> 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. > > Thanks Mike. You phrased my concern perfectly.
I do a lot of consulting and advising with Publishers , Startups and F500 execs and tech teams. "Is it MVC [compatible]?" Always comes up. Specifics aren't important, but people worry terribly about not having a good , natural, separation. MVC is a buzzword that people recognize , so you don't have to go into specifics -- if you just say "Compatible-with / familiar-to MVC practices, that's good enough. You'd be surprised at how many dev environments aren't "MVC" oriented; wordpress and drupal have somehow become frameworks themselves, with too many people building insanity on top of them. Many of those are looking to get out of extreme technical debt. -- 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.
