On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 9:45 PM, Winston Pang <[email protected]> wrote: > Michael 2, > > I agree, that's what's been baffling my decision and what path I should > take, it's so cumbersome, or at least more effort, to define an event > handler on the view interface, implement it, and etc etc. It's trivial to > write, but I believe less code is always better. > > The only good thing is, it's very loosely coupled, which is good. > > Again, I don't understand the dependency injection in this context, unless > you're really interested in swapping presenters, and just updating config > files and have it all work, then I suppose it's good, but what good is it to > have the presenter injected into your view anyways? > > Another thing I've been debating about with other colleagues is the effort > of applying MVP any useful if you're making a pure CRUD based web app? I > mean, what's there to test, if your services etc you call are all well > tested, then what would I be testing? I wrote a test testing that, operation > X on presenter A, when called, will fetch some data and assign an > IEnumerable to a property on the view's interface, and I tested the value, > but again, is that a redundant test? Since I'll have tests to test the call > for fetching data anyways?
Since when does using some design pattern mean changes to your testing procedure? It can either make it harder or simplier; surely the same logical rules still apply: Is this worth testing, is it testable, will test results be useful, will the tests be brittle, is ther a better way, etc, etc ... > Cheers, > > Winston -- silky http://www.programmingbranch.com/
