Thanks for the different perspectives. I'm leaning towards having the functions in the image model.
These functions will only ever be used when modifying an image whose pointer information is stored in database, so having the functions in the model doesn't decrease re-usability for me. Having the functions in the model mean, also, that I don't ever have to call the functions directly. All I have to do is submit data for a new Image, and in that data include information about the desired image dimensions. All the function calls can then be performed by aftersave, which helps keep the controller's code cleaner. -Aran On May 31, 7:18 pm, "b logica" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Dardo Sordi Bogado > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Sure, i can understand having an Image model. I just don't feel that > >> it's the correct place for *manipulation* code. > > > I think you have to work a bit on your own on the idea of "fat models, > > skinny controllers" and think that the models are more than just a way > > to query the database. > > I'm perfectly fine with fat models. However, I don't think *image > manipulation code* belongs in a model. The OP asked for opinions; > we've both shared ours. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CakePHP" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
