On Sun, Sep 1, 2013 at 1:05 AM, Chris McDonough <[email protected]> wrote: > On 09/01/2013 12:24 AM, Jonathan Vanasco wrote: > And furthermore, what framework isn't "MVC" these days? I find it kind of > hard to believe that there's an untapped wellspring of developers that are > currently using raw PHP/ASP;
Yet this is what's behind the question. They want to make sure they don't get stuck in spaghetti-code, and "MVC" is the way they've been taught to express this concern. You can allay this with just a passing sentence drawing attention to the separation between the models and the display code. You can either mention MVC or not, but if you do, it may be better in a footnote, something like, "This programming style is sometimes called MVC, although strictly speaking it's what we call 'better than MVC', with a link to the defense. This could go into the Quick Tour itself, or into a more-in-depth second article after it. By the way, that's an interesting question, "What framework isn't MVC these days?" The word 'framework' has pretty much evolved to mean that. I guess the earliest frameworks were lower-level because even that was a big step, and then they've migrated upward over the years. When I first saw a CGI script in the 1990s, people were parsing the GET/POST variables by hand *in the script*, without a library or even reusable functions. > it's been almost 10 years since Rails came out, > and if these folks don't know about "MVC" frameworks now, they aren't likely > to. Especially since, doesn't Rails have MVC frameworks now? I know they've been backporting some things from the Python frameworks. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
