On Tue, 8 May 2007, Perrin Harkins wrote:
On 5/8/07, Luis Azevedo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What I still not understand is why he says RoR isn't MVC O:).
The way most people use Rails and Catalyst is somewhat different from
the MVC concept. The traditional role of the controller is just to
map user input to a method, and nothing more. All of the business
logic is supposed to be in the model.
There's a little more than just mapping input to a method. I think of it
as a translation layer between how the web server presents data and how my
model API wants it. And then there's reverse mapping, for example
translating exceptions thrown by the model into error messages we can show
to the user.
Most users of RoR and Catalyst put a bunch of code in what gets
referred to as the controller and call auto-generated ORM classes the
model. Most of the code they put in the controller is really the
model too.
I don't ;)
One consequence of doing MVC the "right" way, though, is that you tend to
up with rather large and complex sets of model classes. This doesn't
bother me, but it's definitely the case that I end up with the bulk of my
application's code in the model.
-dave
/*===================================================
VegGuide.Org www.BookIRead.com
Your guide to all that's veg. My book blog
===================================================*/
_______________________________________________
List: [email protected]
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
