> "You wind up with all this controller code spread through hundreds of pages > / components" > > What does that mean? Controller code?
Er..controller code is what's in your code-behind. See http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnpatterns/html/DesPageController.asp .. Microsoft itself acknowledges that page-controller (code behind) may not be suitable for complex applications, and even provides a tutorial on how to replace it with a front controller: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnpatterns/html/DesFrontController.asp > You write a page that does one small > section of your entire application, and you use code-behind to abstract the > business logic from the presentation. That's 2 out of the 3 things you should be doing, and exactly why I think ASP.NET is so widely misused. You should write a page that does one small thing, but the code-behind should _not_ abstract the business logic. The business logic should be in a separate class entirely, one that has no knowledge ASP.NET all (not even how to spell it!). Your code-behind should act as a controller, interacting with that class, not performing that class's duty. > "And most "regular application"s are scary! > > What's so scary about writing an application? I don't mean to be snide, but > it sounds like you haven't figured out how to break up the application into > smaller sub-applications. I figured it out a long time ago, and realized it was a bad idea shortly afterwords. Breaking your application into an API is much more powerful. > "A lot of VB apps I've seen are very anti-architecture" > So what? There's plenty of good ones, and there are plenty of bad ones. > But one point I'll concede - I've never seen a poorly written CF > application... wait a second, there was that one... Right-o, there's crap code out there in every language imaginable. ASP.NET, however, makes it easier to re-use some of the crappy Win32 development techniques on the web. > "(redneck voice: "Hey y'all, we'll just stick the logic on this here > button's OnClick!")" > > So you don't like event-based architecture? Go look at Mach-II then ask Mr. > Corfield what he thinks about it. I like event-based architecture. I don't like seeing it abused as it is by ASP.NET developers sticking their business logic into things like a button's OnClick. Why should I ask Sean what he thinks about it? He's a busy guy, and his blog is easy enough to read: http://www.corfield.org/blog/index.cfm?do=blog.entry&entry=400C3F00-AC4B-A7F0-3C7AC08CF7947335 > "IMHO, ASP.NET is a great technical achievement that got blemished when > MS's marketing group realized they could sell it as "VB for Web apps," > > Gee whiz, some of us don't even use VB to write apps. Lordy, I use c-Sharp. Well, at least we agree on something. VB.NET gives me convulsions, but I think C# is a wonderful language. -- Get Glued! The Model-Glue ColdFusion Framework http://www.model-glue.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Logware (www.logware.us): a new and convenient web-based time tracking application. Start tracking and documenting hours spent on a project or with a client with Logware today. Try it for free with a 15 day trial account. http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=67 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:211854 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
