There are advantages of using MVC for open-source software:
- You don't have to deal with the web-forms 'generated' naming
conventions of rendered HTML which can make it hard to integrate with
JavaScript frameworks
- You have greater control over the HTML, which means it's easier to
implement open-source HTML frameworks such as HTML5 Boiler Plate, or
Foundation 3.
- You're not reliant on ASP's rendering of server controls, so it's
easier to write standards compliant HTML
- There is better separation of concerns between the view code and
logic, which leads to better transparency - always helpful when
working in disparate teams like in the Open Source community.
- Testability: Unlike Web-Forms that are difficult to automatically
test; MVC makes testing frameworks first-class citizens, and the boon
from this cannot be understated:
. You can regression test at the click of a button - almost
essential when others are poking around with your code.
. It can also be used as a 'contract' when working with other
developers - you know what is implemented and working, and what is
not.
. I find Testable code is also better designed code: you think
about separation of concerns and dependencies much more
. There's nothing like getting to 'code freeze' and finding you
have to do a re-design due to uncovering a fundamental flaw. With a
test suite to back you up, re-factoring your design is far less scary.
On 1 February 2013 13:47, Heinrich Breedt <heinrichbre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think you have the wrong idea about MVC.
> Razor Views specifically: It all gets executed server side. You certainly
> dont have to use it. These days I do a lot of knockout pages with hardly any
> razor in them, sometimes not at all.
> It can look a lot like old asp i guess, and with all things it can lead to
> spaghetti code. But I much prefer to be close to the metal with my html.
> Much better than serverside controls and writing html inside page response.
> And if i never have to deal with the page lifecycle it will be too soon.
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Katherine Moss <katherine.m...@gordon.edu>
> wrote:
>>
>> Thank you for the clarification, guys. My thing, since I’m planning to
>> become an open source developer, still, I think that even if I am developing
>> for open source, if I am happy, then I’ll keep one project in one technology
>> if it is working for me, and then I’ll offer a port of it in the other
>> platform or something like that so that people can choose which project they
>> feel more comfortable using. Or I’ll just choose whichever one works. I
>> feel that there is no reason to change a project that is working just for
>> the heck of it, but that’s me. But, the good news is that it doesn’t look
>> like YAF will be moving since there is now a rival forum written in ASP.net
>> MVC right now. So it would be stupid for them to do that. And considering
>> they are commercial as well. And speaking of ASP.net MVC though, I have
>> noticed that not many people use the standard ASPX view, do they? I mean,
>> what’s so special about razor if razor is sort of backtracking to the ASP
>> days? I mean, C# within HTML tags? Come on, people. Go back to VBScript
>> if you’re going to do that.
>>
>>
>>
>> From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com]
>> On Behalf Of Heinrich B
>> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 11:25 PM
>>
>>
>> To: ozDotNet
>> Subject: Re: New Web API project
>>
>>
>>
>> this might help:
>> http://www.west-wind.com/weblog/posts/2012/Aug/07/Where-does-ASPNET-Web-API-Fit
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Katherine Moss
>> <katherine.m...@gordon.edu> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, WebAPI is wrapped inside of MVC4. And there’s another thing that
>> just makes me mad; when people want to rewrite their application for the
>> heck of it just so that they can be deployed under the latest fad. The
>> folks from Yet Another Forum are now saying that their project could be
>> moved and rewritten as ASP.net MVC too, and for what? To look cool?
>> Apparently, and what’s wrong with a project that is written in Web Forms and
>> doing fine? I’m sorry, but I don’t get it. And once that changes, if it
>> does, other folks who use YAF will be screwed including those at Sueetie,
>> who make a great product all based on Web Forms. Though web forms and MVC
>> can work together, though it’s not as simple as one would think. If you
>> want MVC, then use Web Forms MVP. And who said WCF is pointless middleware?
>> Isn’t it a good way to create web services? And if not for WCF, what’s
>> next? Back to ASMX from 2006? Come on! Anyway, guys, I’m sorry for the
>> rant, but I had to get it out somewhere, right?
>>
>>
>>
>> From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com]
>> On Behalf Of Greg Keogh
>> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 7:50 PM
>> To: ozDotNet
>> Subject: Re: New Web API project
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks, glad to know I'm not alone, that link looks sensible and will save
>> a lot of suffering -- Greg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Heinrich Breedt
>>
>> “Do not wait to strike till the iron is hot; but make it hot by striking.”
>> - William B. Sprague
>
>
>
>
> --
> Heinrich Breedt
>
> “Do not wait to strike till the iron is hot; but make it hot by striking.” -
> William B. Sprague
