Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MVC is dead, it's time to MOVE on

cirw.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 233 posts

Re: MVC is dead, it's time to MOVE on

#191

Post by jshen »

alexro wrote: post #148
jshen wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You keep using an appeal to authority, and I still see no value in the distinction. I am most certainly a human user.

If you're so keep on giving a different meaning to already defined standard why not use some other abbreviation, say MRC (R for Representation)

MVC is not a standard. I also don't find it useful to have different names for ideas that are effectively the same with some distinction that doesn't seem to make a difference.

Maybe there is some significant difference, but you haven't outlined one other than "it's not what person X says MVC means".

Re: MVC is dead, it's time to MOVE on

#192

Post by edwinnathaniel »

scottschulthess wrote: post #190
edwinnathaniel wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This article reminds me of Struts2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Struts MVC with "action" (or event, similar semantics). Speaking of Java/Spring-MVC approach, I tend to have a mix approach of Service and Repository (since DAO seems to be getting a lot of bad-rep, time to pick a new name :D). Controller -> Service (SOAP) or Resource (REST) [although Resource could simply forward to Service as well) or Controller…

Well I think it depends, sqlite can behave as an entirely in-memory database I think - so what would be the difference between that and a pure ruby in-memory database, really? If you want to just fake 'em all, which does not sound particularly ideal, people just generally mock em

Yes, my bad for not clarify it: mock the repository part, but not to mock as an entire ActiveRecord.

for example:

FriendsRepository.java is an interface that can be mocked during unit-test while the integration-test would use the actual implementation.

I know that the Java solution tend to be brittle because it somewhat forces people to have 1 interface, 1 class implementation (the mock implementation would be provided by mocking library).

Re: MVC is dead, it's time to MOVE on

#193

Post by eaurouge »

cirwin wrote: post #117
scrame wrote: post #23

This sure looks like MVC, but they call the Controller "operations". The MVC abstraction has an issue with web applications, since the request-response cycle doesn't provide feedback as directly as the hardware-monitor-software cycle that the pattern was originally designed around. However, if the problem is that you are putting too much "logic" into your controllers, you should probably find a better place for it. I…

It's very similar you're correct, particularly when you add in the Manager/Service layer (something that I hadn't spent enough time investigating). The main advantage of Operations over controllers is that they're fully composable. You can take the operation that logs a user in (which displays the login screen, and awaits the user typing a username and password) and use it as a sub-part of any other operation. In a p…

This thing you're calling MOVE, how is it different from Qt's MVC + signals and slots [1]? You've discovered a new (for you) way of applying MVC and you've gone ahead and given it a new name. Nothing in your blog post is new, except the name of course.

If I sound snarky, it's because I'm sick and tired of similar opinionated proclamations in too many self-important blog posts.

Edit: Re the down votes. If you're going to write posts with titles like "MVC is dead" with no justification whatsoever, then proceed to self-post on HackerNews, then I feel justified calling you out on it. Again, I would appreciate someone informing on how MOVE is fundamentally different from MVC.

1. http://doc.qt.nokia.com/4.7-snapshot/model-view-programming....

Re: MVC is dead, it's time to MOVE on

#194

Post by stigi »

jerf wrote: post #113
Xurinos wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect this is because most people do not actually understand what MVC is and how it applies to server-client relationships; in fact, the wikipedia article on MVC is slightly off on the subject, assuming one accepts the original Xerox description as a source. Try not to wrap the entire complicated application into one big MVC umbrella because that will just confuse. There are actually multiple processes involved,…

"The big epiphany for me was when I realized that the server has its own MVC, and the browser has its own MVC." While I'd still advocate DRY over this POV (unless of course DRY leads you here naturally), I will agree this is a generally valid viewpoint, because you've got the server-client model built in there instead of glossed over. And you are now the first person who has gotten me to be generally agreeable about…

Isn't Backbone JS going in that direction. The server just providing an API with rendered JSON as the View which then feeds the Client as the Model?

Re: MVC is dead, it's time to MOVE on

#196

Post by einhverfr »

cirwin wrote: post #117
scrame wrote: post #23

This sure looks like MVC, but they call the Controller "operations". The MVC abstraction has an issue with web applications, since the request-response cycle doesn't provide feedback as directly as the hardware-monitor-software cycle that the pattern was originally designed around. However, if the problem is that you are putting too much "logic" into your controllers, you should probably find a better place for it. I…

It's very similar you're correct, particularly when you add in the Manager/Service layer (something that I hadn't spent enough time investigating). The main advantage of Operations over controllers is that they're fully composable. You can take the operation that logs a user in (which displays the login screen, and awaits the user typing a username and password) and use it as a sub-part of any other operation. In a p…

So I am trying to understand the difference.

Suppose I have an MVC web app. Suppose I add some database triggers so that when some data is entered other things happen. Maybe I flag an invoice to be printed and the trigger notifies a waiting program which processes the invoice data and sends it to the printer.

Now, from the perspective of any single request, the application is MVC-centric. However, from the perspective of the application structure as a whole it's not, because model operations trigger other operations which can have other effects beyond the immediate knowledge of the model.

Is that kind of what you are talking about? MVC with a sort of events backplane?

Re: MVC is dead, it's time to MOVE on

#198

Post by batista »

saraid216 wrote: post #75
Xurinos wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect this is because most people do not actually understand what MVC is and how it applies to server-client relationships; in fact, the wikipedia article on MVC is slightly off on the subject, assuming one accepts the original Xerox description as a source. Try not to wrap the entire complicated application into one big MVC umbrella because that will just confuse. There are actually multiple processes involved,…

> in fact, the wikipedia article on MVC is slightly off on the subject, assuming one accepts the original Xerox description as a source. People complaining about factual inaccuracies on Wikipedia annoy me. It's Wikipedia. The entire point and purpose of it is to fix what you know is wrong. For once, I'd like to see, "I just touched up the Wikipedia article on this subject to explain it a bit more accurately."

>People complaining about factual inaccuracies on Wikipedia annoy me. It's Wikipedia. The entire point and purpose of it is to fix what you know is wrong.

This presupposes

1) I care about fixing it. 2) I have the knowledge to fix it (spotting and removing an inaccuracy is easy, knowing the correct and full set of facts to substitute it with not so much) 3) I can write well enough 4) The Wikipedia process is not convoluted and broken for casual contributors.

Re: MVC is dead, it's time to MOVE on

#199

Post by blahbap »

sophacles wrote: post #153
blahbap wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me give you an example. In your model, you have represented the salary of an employee as an integer. In a web application, the salary can be presented to the user through numerous different views - as a number on the screen (plain HTML), as a slider (jQuery UI slider), as a bar in a bar chart (using some charting library). The tools you use to build the view are not relevant.

Ohhhh, I see now. So some data formats that render to screen through external software are views, like html, json, generated javscript or xml if they go through jQueryUI or charting libraries, but if it goes through other external software like RSS readers, or non html, json, or javscript formats, before making it to the screen, it is no longer a view. Thanks for the clarification!

jQuery UI and the charting lib are not external software, they are part of your system (application). By your logic, every possible digital representation of the model is a view because you can always dig up some tool somewhere to visualize your model. "Look, this floppy disk is a view in my MVC application, just insert it into the Commodore 64 and enter 'LOAD I_LOVE_MVC,8' "

Re: MVC is dead, it's time to MOVE on

#200

Post by jaylevitt »

saraid216 wrote: post #156
mortenjorck wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"I just touched up the Wikipedia article on this subject to explain it a bit more accurately." "But then all my changes were reverted by an overprotective editor; I brought the issues up on the talk page, but my comments were brusquely dismissed."

Your changes would still be in the edit log, and someone more savvy in Wikipedia politics would have the opportunity to get your changes cemented. Said person might be another HN reader who is less knowledgeable about the subject matter. If you don't make any changes, he has nothing to work with except some random whining. (And yes, that's how it works in the real world, too.)

Are you volunteering to help push through wahnfrieden's REST changes, then?
Post reply on HN