I am not actually asking a question but rather an suggestion(or recommendation) on how to write code to fit nicely into Rails MVC pattern. Hope rails veteran or anyone familiar with MVC can give me some feedbacks.
I have an web app that talks to a RESTful api app via ActiveResource. It can fetch and update contents using API calls. It works perfectly. However, the web app does not have any models. The way it works is when user triggers an action(index,view,edit etc), the controller will directly call the REST api to fetch/update data.
My question is: Is it a good practice to do it this way or should I create models and populate data in there instead of directly calling the api? I was wondering if it is just a pragmatic compromise to MVC. I have just started working with Rails(and MVC) so I am open to any ideas, comments or recommendations on this
It's a bit of a catch-22 question. (I did wrote a huge answer but then deleted because it will be too tedious to read)
If you mean, can you implement the MVC pattern without a model, then the answer is no. The M means Model.
If they mean, can you use the MVC without using a model, then the answer is "yes", but it is no longer MVC, you have obliterated the the M i.e. Model.
I would recommend you to read MVC pattern in detail and then try to understand what your application actually trying to do.
http://c2.com/ is a very good place if you want to understand the design patterns.
A model is an object representing data or even activity, e.g. a
database table or even some plant-floor production-machine process.
A view is some form of visualization of the state of the model.
A controller offers facilities to change the state of the model.
Now in your case (it seems): you do have a data coming through via api so I would suggest populate the model properties and propagate it across.
Also Considering Pragmatic Compromise in MVC Dealing with things sensibly and realistically in a way that is based on practical rather than theoretical considerations. Omitting the use of Model in MVC do-not sound like a good idea, and it no longer remains MVC.
Having said that It seems from your point of view you are trying to say that Rails isn't necessarily strictly MVC hence why not use the way you want to :) but I will suggest to keep the integrity of MVC (and follow the purist approach).
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ModelViewController
Good read: jeff Atwoods: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2008/05/understanding-model-view-controller.html (Feel free to skip the asp.net part)
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1242908/in-english-what-really-is-model-view-controller
sums it all :) source is mentioned above.
"The model consists of application data and business rules" (wikipedia)
A model is essentially a table in your database locally.
If you're not storing any data, not validating any data, then you don't need a model.
If you want to clean up your code, maybe put some functions in a helper or in /lib
Related
I am using 3rd party API to get and manipulate data used for my asp.net mvc application. Since I am beginner in MVC, from my standpoint I believe that use of models component of MVC pattern in such cases is not really needed. Only need to use models in this case would be if I would like to additionally manipulate data pulled from API.
Could someone please clarify if I am missing sometime in my theory.
I'm with you on your theory. It might seem a bit overkill to create a set of classes when retrieving data form a 3rd party application. In the beginning it may seem like a lot of unnecessary work.
However, my personal opinion is to always map classes in the MVC application. My reason for doing this is to keep as clear as possible separation of concern in my applications. If you need a similar application in the future or you are changing back-end for some reason, the MVC/front-end application will be as independent as possible.
It is also nice to keep a clear separation of concern if you are working with other developers and if the application will be used for an extended period of time. Also imagine if you would like to do some manipulation of the data, like you say in your own words.
To summarise, I think it is good practice to always keep a model class in your MVC application.
I'm writting an application that has many Ajax widgets (Kendo-UI to be percise). It's starting to get messy to have all those Ajax responses without the standard controllers so I was starting to consider making each entities their own controller. If I'm taking the time to do this, I figured I might as well go foward and do those as WebAPIs since I was planning to do this in a not so close future, but hey, it would be done already...
So my question is: Is it a good practice to use an MVC application's own Web API as a Ajax Widget feeds or is there any reason to stick with standard Controllers?
I've seen some arguments about performance, but I don't think this applies to this situation. I believe it was more of a "Controller calling WebAPI" situation which has obvious performance hits. But since it's already a client side Ajax call, weither it goes into a standard MVC Controller or a WebAPI controller shouldn't change a thing, would it?
Edit
Additional information regarding the project:
I am using Entity Framework for the data access.
I have a repository pattern going on with UnitOfWork.
I am using proper a MVC structure (EF POCOs AutoMapped to DTO POCOs in the repository and fed into View Models by the controllers)
This is a MVC 4 project on .NET 4.0
There is a lot of database relationships (specially for the object I'm working with at the moment)
I don't know about "good practice", but it's certainly not "bad practice". I see no difference whether you do it in the app or a different one.
I think its a good thing but only if what you are doing in the API is kept as generic as possible to other applications and services can reuse the API.
Both the applications I have written and continue to maintain use pretty much the exact same stack as your app.
I have recently re-factored one of the applications to use the API for all the common things like lists that I'm binding to Kendo ComboBoxes etc. in my views. Its a fairly large application that re-uses a lot of the same lists such as states, priorities, complexities across various Entities and views so it makes sense to put those in the API.
I haven't gone as far as going the whole hog through. I draw the line with things like this:
public ActionResult GetAjaxProjectsList([DataSourceRequest]DataSourceRequest request)
{
return Json((DataSourceResult)GetProjectsList().ToDataSourceResult(request), JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet);
}
That is very specific to how the Kendo Grid wants the data back. Nothing else I have connecting to this app will use this data in this format so I keep it in the controller.
In short... I use the API for common things within the same MVC app and things that I allow to be used by other applications or services, like Excel.
Here is my knowing about ASP.NET SPA:
have to use Upshot to talk to the server;
have to use DbDataController to provide Web APIs;
have to use Entity Framework Code first...
so, many concerns come out:
have to provide metadata for the upshot to work, this will obviously expose the structure of your database;
can i use Entity Framework Database First instead of Code First? You may ask why. Because Code First don't provide you the ability to customize your database(index customization, stored procedure...etc.);
A problem i met: when i add a "TestUpshot.edmx" file(generated from database 'northwind') to the MySpaApp.Models folder(trying to test whether i can use the edmx classes in the MyDbDataController class, and generate proper metadata in the client side), and run the application, there is an exception:"System.ArgumentException: Could not find the conceptual model type for MySpaApp.Models.Categories."...
Need help here, thanks in advance.
Dean
I may be missing something, but there is no requirement to use any of the technologies you've listed.
An SPA is just a pattern. You can use whatever you need to achieve that. There may be benefits with choosing certain technologies, ie templates, tutorials, etc.
Doesn't really answer your question, but should lead you to experiment with what you've got.
SPA is actually a way to conceptualize your client application. SPA comes the closest to the fat client - data server concept from the current web approaches. Definitely this will be the ruling concept within a couple of years.
Your concerns can be addressed using JayData at http://jaydata.codeplex.com that provides advanced, high level data access for JavaScript against any kind of EntityFramework back-ends (db, model or code first). Check out this video that presents the whole cycle from importing your EDMX from SQL (this could eighter be model first definition as well) to inserting a new product item in the Products table from JavaScript.
I have been doing ASP.NET MVC at university this year and only touched on some of the basic principles but absolutely loved it. Having been a PHP fan for over 6 years I planned to use something like CakePHP to continue using the MVC pattern in my work.
However I have a few questions as their are MASSIVE differences between the two frameworks:
1.) How would someone do something similar to LINQ where when ever you do your actionresult you can simple build a query and then return it to the view?
2.) Do repositories exists in Cake? I love these in ASP.NET and the ability to create custom methods for your database logic and then call them anywhere.
3.) Confusion with the model. In ASP.NET I could have a single model deal with lots of tables and then call any table or combination of tables with ease. In Cake it seems you have a model per table???
CakePHP comes with its own persistence API, whereas in ASP.NET MVC you can (and have to) use something else of your choosing.
1) There isn't an equivalent to LINQ in CakePHP, but you can still construct queries pretty easily.
2) CakePHP's models can have functions attached, and they also have something called Behaviors which are neat.
3) CakePHP's persistence system associates one model with a persistent entity (such as a table). I'm not sure I can give a better answer with out a more specific example.
I did a lot of PHP work before I moved on to .NET. While I still like ASP.NET MVC or RoR better (mostly because they are better frameworks and languages, IMHO, than PHP), the few projects I did in CakePHP were very pleasant.
I am not familiar with ASP.NET, but I can answer some of these questions.
LINQ... I am not familiar with. If
you could give a simple example, I
could explain if there is a similar
method in Cake.
The Repositories you refer to can be
Behaviors as mentioned by
#HackedByChinese. However, you may
have better results by adding
functions to the app_model.php file.
All models in the app can access any
function in the app_model.php file
which can be added to your app
directory.
Yes. CakePHP is designed with code
separation in mind. The idea behind
a single table per model allows you
build a very FAT model and still
keep it manageable. You build all of
the relationships, validation, and
other model specific code into each
model. Then when something goes
wrong with Users for example, you
know you need to look in the Users
model. This can be overridden, you
can put all of the model access into
a single model file if you want, but
it makes the code sloppy. If you are
going to do that, why use Cake? Just
put all of your model code in
Model.php, all of your controller
code in Controller.php and all of
your view code in View.php and call
it good. I think you would agree
that is not the structure for very
readable nor extensible code.
I'm a newbie. I want to ask about the MVC model for separation of concerns. I have read up a few MVC tutorials but I don't yet have a full understanding of the roles of each of the Model, View and Controller.
For instance say I am writing an application for a user to monitor a portfolio. I would like the landing page to display lists of investments based of different criteria, for instance one may list investments based on amount invested, another may order it based on investment performance.
My question is, in accordance with the design pattern where should I write logic for generating the lists; in the Model, View or Controller?
Also any asp.net MVC examples demonstrating seperation of concerns is much appreciated.
Thanks in advance guys.
At the risk of repeating myself, I'll point you to the answer I gave in this thread. The entire thread is probably worth your time, as are dozens of others on Stack Overflow.
To break it down simply:
Controllers - control application flow and makes decisions about data.
Models - perform business logic.
Views - produce output.
For your particular situation, you will want to produce your lists in the View layer. Use templates to create your list structure, and fill them with data fetched from the Model layer.
I'm not an asp.net programmer, so I can't give you a reliable example, but have a hunt around for other SO threads.
Nice question, this is subjective and there are many solutions, it comes down to the context I think and the preferences of the individual.
With ASP.Net implementation of MVC alot of people talk about the Model being more of a ViewModel than a Model as in some other frameworks (somewhat of a DTO). This in mind and looking at the Controller as just a coordinator of the flow of the application, it would not be wrong to generate the lists in an additional layer accessed via a service of some type. You would make a request to that service for a set of ViewModels which meet a specified set of criteria and let that extra layer worry about the way in which those lists are generated from that set of criteria. This way all the controller needs to know about is passing some criteria to the service and providing the view with a set of models (viewmodels) to display, the view is free of making any decisions about what to do with the data it has been provided, and the models are nice and lightweight.
Hope this explanation makes sense, and I'm open to criticism if people don't agree...
MVC pattern "requires" you to insert all your "business logic" in the Models. Models are used to access database and fetch data and mold it in a way that you just have to use a Controller to assign it into a View.
An graphical example : http://www.bhartisoftland.com/technologies-skill-sets/gifs/mvc-php.png
Needless to say perhaps, that you can bypass the use of models and write all your logic in the Controllers, but that would result in a very extensive and probably redundant amount of code. Controllers are used so you can call Models and Views, and exchange information from one to another with just a few lines of code.