Blog
Recent Entries
Is Your QA Process Ready for Your Next ColdFusion or BoxLang Release?
As applications continue to evolve, QA can easily become reactive. Teams may test late in the development process, focus only on happy-path scenarios, repeat manual checks, or rely on AI-generated changes without fully validating the results. These gaps can create risks that are not always visible until they affect users, disrupt operations, or require costly fixes in production.
Your Development Team Is at Capacity. Here’s How to Keep Critical Work Moving!
The problem is not that your team lacks priorities.It is that maintenance, delivery, and long-term improvement are competing for the same people.
For companies running business-critical CFML, ColdFusion, or BoxLang applications, that pressure can be especially difficult to solve. Experienced developers are not always easy to hire quickly, application knowledge may be concentrated in one or two people, and a generalist may need significant context before taking ownership of the work. A permanent hire can also require a significant investment in recruiting, compensation, onboarding, and long-term capacity even when the immediate need is a specific project, urgent maintenance, or a period of transition.
Copy of BoxLang AI 3.4 Blog Series Part 5 : Reasoning Without the Guesswork
Reasoning-capable models have been usable in BoxLang AI for a while. params passes straight through to the provider body, so params: { thinking: { type: "enabled", budget_tokens: 10000 } } for Claude, or params: { reasoning_effort: "high" } for OpenAI, already reached the API. What never worked was reading the reasoning back. It was parsed out on arrival and silently dropped. In 3.4.0, that's fixed, and it's fixed the same way for every provider.
Add Your Comment
(11)
Aug 17, 2007 20:41:41 UTC
by Tim
http://code.google.com/p/litepost/
A ColdBox version.
Aug 20, 2007 14:53:45 UTC
by Damien McKenna
SES. Any chance of moving it back from 2.3? I can probably write a .htaccess file for you to remove the need for the whole part and have it simply do , if you'd like?
Aug 20, 2007 21:26:09 UTC
by Dave
I second the SES, without the need need to type index.cfm/.
Aug 21, 2007 01:35:00 UTC
by Luis Majano
I think both approaches can be done. One with the front controller and the other one by pure web server rewrite
Aug 21, 2007 09:10:32 UTC
by Damien McKenna
Any plans for an official ORM?
Aug 21, 2007 12:54:03 UTC
by Luis Majano
Not really, it is so easy to use Transfer or Object Breeze or Reactor with ColdBox, that it just doesn't make sense for me to delve into building an ORM. My personal choice is Transfer, I have been using it for a while now and don't see why I would ever want to create one.
Aug 28, 2007 10:35:22 UTC
by John
How about adding the File Browser from the Dashboard as a plugin?
Sep 07, 2007 07:32:18 UTC
by Dave
Handling form data like this:
http://www.briankotek.com/blog/index.cfm/2007/9/4/Implicit-Creation-of-Arrays-and-Structures-from-Form-Fields
It would be really neat to be able to pass arrays and structs based on the input names.
-Dave
Sep 07, 2007 12:29:40 UTC
by Luis Majano
That is very interesting Dave, it could be a great addition to the beanFactory as an implicit manipulation. Maybe a setting in your application that activates complex form fields. Do you think that having a setting to turn this ON/OFF would be a good idea?
Sep 07, 2007 20:46:34 UTC
by Dave
You would need to have a on/off setting I would think or it would break backwards-compatibility.
-Dave
Sep 08, 2007 11:20:05 UTC
by Dave
Having had sometime to think on it... I would think that add a new function or argument to the event scope might be better then an on/off setting... Such as:
event.getCollection('Implicit')
or
event.getImplicitCollection
that way it wouldn't be an all or nothing thing and you could use it when the situation suited you.
-Dave