The example warns about calling action() which has to clone half the
dispatch process, dispatch a new action, grab the response body and return
it. Obviously that's a pretty expensive call. That said, I have to agree
with the commenter. You could get a similar result with:
class My_View_Helper_BugList extends Zend_View_Helper_Abstract
{
public function bugList(Bug $model)
{
// ...
}
}
// In your controller
$this->view->bug = new Bug();
// In your view
$this->butList($this->bug);
That way your view (and view helper) only handle the display logic and the
controller handles passing the model to the view.
CM
<http://cmorrell.com/> *Chris Morrell* Web: http://cmorrell.com Twitter:
@inxilpro <http://twitter.com/inxilpro>
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 6:58 PM, My Lists <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello people, check out this example found at :
>
> http://framework.zend.com/manual/en/performance.view.html
>
>
> class My_View_Helper_BugList extends Zend_View_Helper_Abstract
> {
> public function bugList()
> {
> $model = new Bug();
> $html = "<ul>\n";
> foreach ($model->fetchActive() as $bug) {
> $html .= sprintf(
> "<li><b>%s</b>: %s</li>\n",
> $this->view->escape($bug->id),
> $this->view->escape($bug->summary)
> );
> }
> $html .= "</ul>\n";
> return $html;
> }
> }
>
>
> I like the approach to attach the Model inside view helper for
> specific stuff and reusability. Im right now needing a helper exactly
> like this but i dont know if i'm violating any pattern rule.
>
> One guy as commented out about above example that this is a bad
> practive since the view shouldn't know the model. What do you think
> about this ? Should i go ahead in the same way?
>
> I have read in many places that this is pretty acceptable in the MVC,
> just wanted to confirm this.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
