It's also worth remembering that, while it's common in Rails apps, 1:1 model/controller correspondence is not part of the MVC pattern, so moving all complex logic into the model helps to keep your controllers DRY too.
At a more fundamental level, FM/SC promotes good OO practice by loosely coupling the controllers to the models - the less your controller knows about your models, the better. On 24/02/2011, at 10:12 AM, David Goodlad wrote: > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 7:26 PM, jamesl <[email protected]> wrote: > But why is the practice of a Fat Model more acceptable than a Fat > Controller? > > I agree with most of the arguments for a skinny controller, and generally > adhere to this principle. The argument that resonates best with me, though, > is ease of testing. Testing complex logic in controllers well is not an easy > task, and that usually indicates that you're Doing It Wrong. > > Cheers > Dave > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ruby or Rails Oceania" 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/rails-oceania?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby or Rails Oceania" 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/rails-oceania?hl=en.
