Chris McDonough wrote:
Then finally, in maybe 2005 or so, it was adopted by web frameworks to
mean something entirely different. See also
http://docs.pylonsproject.org/projects/pyramid/1.0/designdefense.html#pyramid-gets-its-terminology-wrong-mvc
This clears up the things a bit as to why you didn't want to call
Pyramid an MVC framework.
So these days "MVC" is just a marketing acronym. Its value is only as
a binary marketing identifier ("this framework is MVC, that one is
not"). "Non-MVC" frameworks tend to put both presentation and
business logic into the same place (e.g. PHP into a template), while
"MVC" ones do not. But the individual letters of the acronym are
nonsensical to try to adhere to in most web frameworks. If you're
trying to be "more MVC" in your code, you will have a very difficult
time, because it's just not really a technical goal to aspire to.
There would be no generally agreed upon way to do it, because MVC
doesn't have any sensible well-understood shared technical meaning.
In Pyramid the thing we used to call controller is now called view. The
thing that we used to call view can be named template. So what's the
difference (apart from naming conventions)? So called MVC frameworks
don't force me to use their "V" part either ;)
What do you mean by trying to be "more MVC" then? Using templates for
JSON responses?
--
Juliusz Gonera
http://juliuszgonera.com/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"pylons-discuss" 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/pylons-discuss?hl=en.
