That sounds kinda smart. Is there any chance you could post some example code?
Chas. Kris Nuttycombe wrote: > Oh, I'm not complaining about the way User is handled - my response was > more about the general hate towards MVC upthread. Having a sensible > default for a standard use case is great, even when I'll probably never > use the default. > > In my Lift app, my shortcut to different renderings (well, different > bindings, really) is to keep all the binding logic for a specific case > in a trait and have an implicit conversion from my model to the > appropriate trait in the relevant scope. You still have to do the work, > but it makes the bindings a lot easier to reuse. > > Kris > > On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Charles F. Munat <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > I don't see how you're any worse off if the model can render itself in > one way. And if that way is a common standards-compliant way, such as > rendering to XML, and you include semantic information, then you can > layer any other layers you want on top to do the mapping to the 30 > different contexts. > > Saying that an object should know how to render itself to some > universally recognized format is not the same as saying that that solves > all rendering issues. > > Is there some shortcut to 30 different renderings that I'm missing, or > do you have to do the work either way? > > Chas. > > Kris Nuttycombe wrote: > > If you want to render a model 30 different ways in 30 different > > contexts, it kind of sucks though, doesn't it? > > > > Or what if, shock horror, you don't know how the eventual system is > > going to want to render the model (i.e., the person doing the > rendering > > won't be able to change the model code.) Not too uncommon, I > don't think... > > > > Kris > > > > On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Michael <mike.sr <http://mike.sr> > > <http://mike.sr>@gmail.com <http://gmail.com> <http://gmail.com>> > wrote: > > > > > > > Also I was looking at the sample model source code (User, > ProtoUser) > > > and saw presentation logic mixed in it. Shouldn't the > business and > > > model logic be kept separated from the presentation logic > or is there > > > a Lift strategy it? > > > > Hmm, a model that can render itself ... That sounds like this > crazy > > paradigm called object-oriented programming. Some radicals > say it has > > some advantages over the more procedural style of MVC. > > > > -- Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" 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/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
