Anyone able to help me understand what is happening here? Are properties lazy-loaded? test.cfm:

<cfscript>
	Dog = new Dog();
	test = Dog.doesItHavePaws();
</cfscript>

Dog.cfc:

component accessors="true" extends="Pet" {
	function init() {
		super.init();
		return this;
	}

	boolean function doesItHavePaws() {
		var result = variables.hasPaws;
		writeOutput( "result: " & result );
		return result;
	}
}

Pet.cfc:

component accessors="true" {
	property name="hasPaws" type="boolean" default="true";

	function init() {
		return this;
	}
}

The result is an error: Element hasPaws is undefined in Variables. However, if I add a writedump(Dog) in test.cfm, it shows the dump, and the function works fine, outputting my result.

<cfscript>
	Dog = new Dog();
	writedump(Dog);
	test = Dog.doesItHavePaws();
</cfscript>

Alternatively, I can use getHasPaws() in the doesItHavePaws() method (instead of variables.hasPaws) and that works. From what I've read, though, variables is private to the CFC, but that's where I'm accessing it. And what would an external call to writedump() the object do that would make the default of the property suddenly work fine? Also, this seems to be related to the extended component's properties only. If I move the property into Dog(), variables.hasPaws works fine.

Which CF engine? Seems to work as expected on Lucee 5.4.6.9

ACF 2023

Maybe an ACF bug then? As long as it has a value at the time of calling, a property defined in a parent component should be available to a child.

Have you tried adding mappedSuperClass=“true” ?

No, just tried it, but no luck.

I always thought

mappedSuperClass

was just for ORM entity inheritance.

worth a try, anyway ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I know lucee actually obeys default values on properties. Adobe didn't used to and I would have hoped they had changed that by now, but perhaps not

Seems not always. I've had mixed results.

it seemed like to me on adobe that if I wanted the variables scope to reflect the default properly, I had to use the accessor first (getX() or setX()). I also usually just use the getter to access it, as it seems more consistently behaved. I'd either var result = getHasPaws() or var result = invoke("", "getHasPaws") if you want it easier to variabalize the hasPaws part.

I think what you have found is a bug. This is confirmed by the fact that you don't get the error after inserting the writedump. You should report it, so Adobe can at least have a look at it. Here is why I think your original code should have worked. The line

property name="hasPaws" type="boolean" default="true";

implies that Pet.cfc implicitly contains the methods

getHasPaws()

and

setHasPaws(true)

, with

variables.hasPaws=true;

being implicitly defined in the setter.