REQUEST 1 rc.data = variables.blogService.list();
REQUEST 2 rc.data = variables.blogService.list();

I think if something like this happen in Lucee/Coldfusion, it would be abandoned somewhere around year 2000 as unusable platform. I'm not big on multithreading, but never got an issue you mentioned with cfml or fw/1 in years.

Well. Normally I would agree with you, but because the entire application is sharing what is read/written to

<http://variables.blog|variables.blog>

, I am not so sure. I mean, we are sometimes meant to lock down application variables and other bits of code that might spawn a race condition. I just wondered whether this is one such example?

I don't thing it's possible to have race condition in REQUEST scope. Setting APPLICATION or SESSION vars should be Exclusively-locked I think.

no race conditions BETWEEN requests. application and session writes are thread safe but only within their respective application.cfc methods (onApplicationStart() and onSessionStart()). you'd most likely need to lock writes elsewhere if there's the possibility of race conditions

at least that's my understanding

It's early so maybe I'm misunderstanding this - but why not use the 'local' scope (or var)? "Variables that you declare with the Var keyword inside a cffunction tag or CFScript function definition are available only in the method in which they are defined, and only last from the time the method is invoked until it returns the result. The Variables scope is not the same as the function local scope, which makes variables private within a function. Always define function-local variables using the var keyword of the Local scope name."

FW/1 injects Service into Controller's variable scope

Yes. But all controllers/services are placed in the application scope, by default. When we inject into a controller like:

property fooService;

My understanding is that because the actual controller component is in the application scope, everything inside the component, including properties, which are in the

variables

scope, also persist. You can see this when you dump out the application scope. The point I am trying to make, is that any variable inside a service, in the

variables

scope, is a singleton, as well. This makes it vulnerable to being changed by more than one request. If services were transients, each request would get given a new instance. In this case, there would be no problem, because each request would be given its own copy of all the variables inside each service.

If you dump out the application scope, you will see the controllers/services. The beans are transients [instances]

i still think the flaw is mutating variables-scoped variables in singletons. it just feels you're trying to plug a hole created by not having any DAOs (which would be injected into the services as required)

I should be using DAOs, but to be honest that would only provide an extra level of organisation. However, I absolutely agree with your opinion about

variables

scope mutation inside a singleton. I only used this approach, because I found it in an FW1 example application. And to be fair, the objective, within the example app, was very possibly correct and I corrupted it. So, I’m going to remove the

variables

scope variable and just return the list data from the

page()

method. Before:

function page(page){
    // build variables.blogs struct from DB query
    …
   cfloop(query=local.qGetFile, startrow=local.startrow, endrow=local.endrow){
        // add blog bean to variables.blogs
        …
        variables.blogs[local.qGetFile.File_ID] = blog;
    }
}

After:

function page(page){
    // build variables.blogs struct from DB query
    …
    local.pagedata = {
        recordcount: local.recordcount,
        list: {}
    };
   cfloop(query=local.qGetFile, startrow=local.startrow, endrow=local.endrow){
        // add blog bean to variables.blogs
        …
        local.pagedata.list[local.qGetFile.File_ID] = blog;
    }
    return local.pagedata;
}

To answer the question: do not use variables scope in controllers for request-specific data ever. Use

rc

or `local`/`var` scope variables only. The

variables

scope of a controller should only be used to cache global state (like an in-memory copy of a fixed lookup table or some such) and should either be initialized in the constructor method

init()

via dependency injection, or with careful locking as if dealing with

application

scope.

I have a question for the class. To caveat this.. I can't share code or anything specific so please don't ask. I have a strange situation w/ a FW/1 app. The app, even in production, needs to have reload on every request enabled. If not, strange errors happen all over the place. I have some ideas as to what I am looking for to fix this. But was wondering if anyone else has ran into something like this and what they may have discovered was their fix.

Over the years, I have developed several fw1 applications that involve pretty granular permissions. Since a given permission might be required for a number of different section/action combinations, I’ve used various schemes for relating the fw1 context to permissions. But I’m curious as to how others might have dealt with the situation, if anyone is willing to share how they have attacked this.

Never used AOP with fw/1, reading docs: https://framework-one.github.io/documentation/3.1/using-aop-one/ - code examples are good, but no mention of FILES where these examples should be used... stuck! :)

@jakobward has left the channel

Does DI not occur before the session is setup? I thought I had this working, but restarting my server is showing an error on trying to reference a service The service is available in before() but not in setupSession() apparently

public void function setupSession() {
		// set up a default session
		variables.userService.defaultUserSession();

	}

	function before( struct rc = {} ) {
		
		// reset the application 
		if(structKeyExists(rc, 'resetApp')) {
			userService.logout();
		}
		
		// user session data
		rc["userSession"] = variables.userService.getUserSession();
				
	}

I am getting Original exception in onSessionStart The action main.default failed. Component [Application] has no accessible Member with name [USERSERVICE] (expression)

@gundberg has left the channel

I have a controller/view. (Section.item) that takes one primary key I’d and renders the instruction for that item. Works perfectly. Now, I am attempting to add a new section.item is same section to take user input of more than one primary id but was hoping to call the controller from this new view looping over list of ids and cannot figure out how to implement. Controller () cannot be called from view and calling the view only does not take new parameters into account. I know this is no code but maybe I need fresh eyes to tell me use fooBar dummy? Looking for ideas. Anyone got any for me?

Sorry if this is obvious but I haven't figured it out. One our subsystem bubbles up to the default layout, in that layout a few views are called. The subsystem complain the views cannot be found, is this a bad design? Should the default layout not have views included? Also, is it possible to call a view from the main app in a subsystem? Thanks!

I'm wondering if anyone can shed some light on this. In the /framework/one.cfc onSessionStart() method, the setupRequestDefaults() is called first. This has the repercussion of not being able to use an added route (via addRoute()) that's been added during the onRequestStart() for the initial request of the session. (because routes are only processed once in the request). In review of setupRequestDefaults(), I don't see anything that's required for the session - but I could be missing something. I guess I just want to see if there's a reason it's being called on the session start.

public any function onSessionStart() {
        setupRequestDefaults();
        setupSessionWrapper();
    }

Intro question - if I want to use fw1 for building new areas of a large legacy app - is my only option to hook it up to the root app.cfc and use

unhandledPaths

for all my existing stuff? Or can i hook up fw1 to an app.cfc in a subdir and just have that dir and below benefit from the framework? And assuming running in a sub dir is fine, are there any other major complications tied to running it on a small part of a legacy site? Thanks!

Trying to figure something out. Hope someone here may have an idea. I am working to port over a legacy app into FW/1. Where I am struggling is a couple hard requirements. The first is that I have to have the app still work with old urls. Second, is that I still have to support webservice WSDL calls. The part I am struggling with is supporting the legacy WSDL urls. They will eventually be converted to rest calls but that is down the road. Normally I would just put in some url rewrites and be done with it. However, I can't (not my decision). URL rewrites are completely off the table as a solution. I have been able to get it working in parts using onMissingTemplate and a redirect. That works, but also doesn't. Redirects on a webservice call causes some odd errors on the caller. So I have to figure it out without using a redirect. Ideally, if I can just call a controller from onMissingTemplate that would probably work. However, I can't seem to get that to work either. So, any ideas? I feel like I am missing something simple that would handle this but ???

I added a bookmark here, linking to the #fw1 channel archive on cfml.linen.dev

Started using fw/1 in a legacy app, which has about 20 subdirs under the root. Right now, it’s working nicely in 1 of those subdirs, with an app.cfc in the subdir. As I expand the usage of fw/1 gradually to other areas of the app (to other sub dirs), any recommendations on how to do that. I could do what I did before, but that will end up with multiple subdirs with their own app.cfc and fw/1 instances. Should I be looking at subsystems instead? Or maybe just implement at the root with all the legacy subdirs in unhandledPath list, until I get to convert them? Thanks

I used to use DI/1 and really liked the simple nature of using the framework but, I am having some reservations about re-adopting it as I am worried about having it not work as CF/Lucee update . Wirebox seems solid but just prefer DI/1 simpler configuration.

is there a way to list all beans contained in a di/1 beanFactory?

anyone present here for a question?

Hey - I am gradually converting sections of a legacy site to FW/1. I have some unconverted sections that have pages that could ideally use some small sections of output that I already have FW/1 views for in converted sections. Is this doable? I don't think cfinclude works like that, so I guess I'd have to wrap the call to the FW/1 view in a separate request - like say an ajax call or call get the output from a REST service? I am sure I am missing something. thanks

I'm coding a project in Lucee 6 with FW/1 4.3 on Windows Server 2019. Now, I'm trying to get SES working without index.cfm being displayed. Both generateSES and SESOmitIndex are set to true in application.cfc. I also have the IIS Rewrite module installed. Do any of you have a web.config rewrite script or know how to accomplish this with Lucee?