April 13th, 2015, 01:08 PM
-
getApplicationSettings in CF11???
I'm in the process of migrating all our websites to a new web server and thought i'd take this opportunity to upgrade to CF11.
all my sites seem to work fine but this one function is really causing me some headaches. Because the getApplicationSettings is undocumented I'm having trouble finding if it even exists in CF11.
Code:
<cfinclude template="#application.getApplicationSettings().SITEROOT#page_parts/dom_head.cfm"/>
The error it's throwing:
Element SITEROOT is undefined in a Java object of type class coldfusion.runtime.StructBean.
The error occurred in E:/web-sites/CMS/page_parts/header.cfm: line 9
This is my first day dealing with CF11 so if there is an alternative function i could use please feel free to point it out to me.
April 13th, 2015, 02:06 PM
-
Originally Posted by dsfx
I'm in the process of migrating all our websites to a new web server and thought i'd take this opportunity to upgrade to CF11.
all my sites seem to work fine but this one function is really causing me some headaches. Because the getApplicationSettings is undocumented I'm having trouble finding if it even exists in CF11.
Code:
<cfinclude template="#application.getApplicationSettings().SITEROOT#page_parts/dom_head.cfm"/>
The error it's throwing:
This is my first day dealing with CF11 so if there is an alternative function i could use please feel free to point it out to me.
Ok So after some digging i found a SO topic with this exact problem. In CF10 right before release they changed getApplicationSettings to GetApplicationMetaData. You also don't prepend application to the beginning of the function.
My links now look like this:
Code:
<cfinclude template="#GetApplicationMetaData().SITEROOT#page_parts/dom_head.cfm"/>
There was very poor documentation regarding this.
April 22nd, 2015, 04:54 PM
-
Originally Posted by dsfx
Ok So after some digging i found a SO topic with this exact problem. In CF10 right before release they changed getApplicationSettings to GetApplicationMetaData. You also don't prepend application to the beginning of the function.
My links now look like this:
Code:
<cfinclude template="#GetApplicationMetaData().SITEROOT#page_parts/dom_head.cfm"/>
There was very poor documentation regarding this.
I'd not recommend upgrading to CF11 for the following reasons:
1. Some of the tags that worked perfectly fine in CF10 have been deprecated. For example: cfgraph no longer works!.
2. They changed cfchart mechanics. It now uses Zing Charts with JSON styling. If you have any exiting charts that use XML
type styling, they will no longer work! You literally have to rewrite them. There was a promise of a conversion tool, which
fails miserably!
3. With CF11 update 5, they introduced some bugs.
a. cfstoredproc no longer returns out parameters. If your stored procedure has out parameters, they simply disappear.
b. encrypt(string, .... ) string needs to be in "#string#". Otherwise, it breaks.
4. documentation or the lack of it is extremely frustrating.
This is what I/we have found so far.
-
Originally Posted by Master__Chief
I'd not recommend upgrading to CF11 for the following reasons:
1. Some of the tags that worked perfectly fine in CF10 have been deprecated. For example: cfgraph no longer works!.
2. They changed cfchart mechanics. It now uses Zing Charts with JSON styling. If you have any exiting charts that use XML
type styling, they will no longer work! You literally have to rewrite them. There was a promise of a conversion tool, which
fails miserably!
3. With CF11 update 5, they introduced some bugs.
a. cfstoredproc no longer returns out parameters. If your stored procedure has out parameters, they simply disappear.
b. encrypt(string, .... ) string needs to be in "#string#". Otherwise, it breaks.
4. documentation or the lack of it is extremely frustrating.
This is what I/we have found so far.
Wow that encrypt is a big one for me, i'm going to have to test and possibly change a bunch of code. I'll have to look at the cfstoredproc as well it's ringing a bell but i can't remember for what!!!
Anyways thanks for the reply.