> I don't think that the current ASP .NET model is too far off of the MVC
> path. Mostly I think that MVC isn't enforced, but the foundation is
> inherently there.
>
> If I had to do a mapping from struts to ASP .NET I would put things like
> this:
>
> .jsp --> .aspx
> ActionForm --> Code behind page of .aspx
> Action --> Code behind page of .aspx
> Model --> any .NET classes or Com objects that your Code behind page calls.
>
If you peruse some of the Microsoft-related public mailing lists, you'll note that code-behind pages are not universally popular among Microsoft based developers -- it seems that more than a few people like to code things directly in their ASP pages, instead of having any separation.
In other words, it's the old "Model 1 or Model 2" debate again :-)
I'd like to say that Java developers have advanced passed that point but that debate seems to reoccur too often. The last time I debated it, it became clear that developers who have felt the pain of inheriting Model 1 or scripted projects agree with MVC principals; those who have worked on small, one person projects don't see anything wrong with Model 1.
David
Craig
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
