I have planned to write my own light weight MVC for PHP, that will be used as base for my sites I develop. I have no problem with PHP, OOP, et al. I have trouble on how to actually load Models In controllers and use them amd loading Controller values into Views. In short, I don't know how M-V-C interact behind the scenes.
Any tutorial (concentrating on that) or any contribution is welcomed!
Thanks!
ASP.NET MVC is open source: http://aspnet.codeplex.com/releases/view/58781
Edit: consider this: I believe you are trying to reinvent the wheel, thinking that those MVC framework out there are heavy and packed with uncessary features (acording to your double use of the word lightweigth). In my experience, I always ended up coding those extra "features" because a framework is required to evolve. Loading models In controllers, using them and loading controller values into views is just the begining. If you want to get started eventually, it would be a better investment to write some helper classes and methods: a popular pattern in the MVC world. Unless you are writing a MVC framework from scratch for fun and I am totally wrong (you said you needed a base to use for your sites ).
Best of luck!
Codeigniter is an open source MVC framework of php.
http://codeigniter.com/user_guide/overview/appflow.html
The major in MVC is first of all your controller class initiated and then calls view.
After google and check how other MVC works I decided to take this route. I redirect all my requests with .htaccess to index.php. Then there I define base paths. After all the definitions I include the core.php which in turn includes all core files to my mvc framework. Then in the same file I create Instances of Registry and router and the game starts from here!
Internals are a bit complex now but that is what I ended with!
Related
Why are models not in a separate Model folder in the api template? The original template comes with WeatherForecast.cs as a separate file just by itself.
Are we not supposed to have a folder for models?
In this template you actually get minimal settings for ASP.NET project as program.cs and startup.cs with minimum configuration.
Then you choose how your folders will be located, depending on what you are going to do. If you want to make a couple of controllers with couple of methods, and you are not going to expand the functionality, you can write all the functionality of your program there and create two folders: controllers and models. In the case where you need to build a large application with a lot of logic, you need to use common web application architectures.
You can read this article and find a right direction for searching, but it is more than just "separate file and folders", this is a very big topic for thought.
I am refactoring some code and am working with another programmer. I suggested refactoring the code to follow the MVC pattern to remove all the plumbing from the forms code and put them into seperate classes such as a controller and model class for database. He disagreed with me saying that VB is not meant for MVC and that we should put the code into DLL's. I agree with DLL's but put the MVC into the DLL's is my opinion. Have I got the wrong idea ?
It is a desktop application? because in that case it would be more useful a pattern of MVVC. In any case, I recommend that you seek information from Domain Driven Development (DDD). Here's an article from a practical example =>http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/768664/Introduction-to-ASP-NET-Boilerplate
I need some assistance in creating a simple html page and locate it in the server.
Since I couldnt find it in the doc I tried to put a index2.html file in the /public library and when I tried to get receive it using
http://127.0.0.1:3000/index2.html
or
http://127.0.0.1:3000/public/index2.html
and receiver
ActionController::RoutingError (No route matches [GET] "/public/index2.html"):
how do I get the html from the server
how di I make it the default.
Thanks.
EDIT : thanks for your answers. I am looking for the simplest way to work. in many tutorials it says you can put it in the public folder and thats it. This will same me useless controllers.
You can do that in several ways : the more obvious would be to have an action in one of your controller (or a new one, whatever) that does nothing (except render the view), and add a route to it. There is other ways to achieve this too, with more adapted tools. I never used any of them, so might want to google it (static page rails), but I know one of them is a gem called High Voltage. Hope this serves you well.
I think you might have mis-understood Rails...
I have never used it but I think I can probably help you with your answer. Rails is the most popular MVC framework for the language Ruby, hence 'Ruby on Rails'. Here is a link to the MVC framework this may help you understand it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model%E2%80%93view%E2%80%93controller
With the MVC framework you can't 'get' a file directly through the URL. You have to get it through the routing engine. Usually you do this through a Controller which renders a view, typically, from a model.
It's difficult to explain if you don't understand how the MVC framework works but once you have an understanding you should be able to develop web applications very rapidly.
Have a look here for creating your first rails app:
http://guides.rubyonrails.org/getting_started.html
I've been recommended the Click framework from Apache. But I can't find any forums talking about benchmark, reviews, advantages, disavantages, usefulness, ease of implementation, etc.
I've been asked to use it to develop a web site, but I'm completly in the dark about its strengths and weaknesses.
And its damn name isn't helping !! Click ? Hey Apache ! Call your next framework "the" just for fun. I dare you.
So can anyone comment on his experience with Click ?
What I personally like about the Click framework is that it is fairly close to HTML/HTTP and the Servlet API. There is no huge abstraction to get familiar with. You have a Page class, a Form class, ... If you need to preserve state across invocations you put it in the session or you pass it through the URL... This makes it easy to start using it. It is also straightforward to control the HTML pages being generated. It may sound like it is a very basic framework but the simplicity is actually one of it greatest strengths.
Other frameworks (e.g. Seam) are more suitedr to create a very large web application with lots of reusable components and complicated pageflows but the learning curve is much steeper. So for me Click works well for small to medium sized websites.
It's an apache incubator project but that does not mean the project is not stable, rather it reflects that it is in transition to the Apache project model.
Click is Apache's version of a component based web framework equivalent to JSF (other component base Java Frameworks are Tapestry and Wicket)
Click is rated at Ohloh
There is an official blog and some Wikipedia references: Framework Comparision and info page
Just say you have a quite large and complicated desktop application written in objective-c/cocoa written properly in MVC. You then wish to replace the V and C so that it is a web application?
Is there anything like Tomcat but for objective c? The closest thing I can think of is somehow convert the Model code into an apache module to load in apache?
Obviously I could embed some sort of HTTP server and write a whole pile of code to manage sessions and requests and responses and so on, but might there be a simpler way?
You can leave the server almost as-is. I'd run it as a daemon in the background.
I'd split the controller part. One part of it resides on the server as a connection between HTTP requests and the daemon.
You could run a self-made http server.
You could build it into a Apache module as you mentioned.
You could access your controller through CGI. This is the easiest option as I see it.
The second part of the controller is written in Javascript in the browser, exchanging data with the server and updating the GUI.
The view part is written completely in javascript.
You could - if you want - leave out the controller on the server and make the model understand HTTP requests.
For the Controller / View part consider using a framework.
jQuery for only a light interface. (Or a similar framework.)
I haven't yet found a framework that leaves all the model stuff to the server. Maybe you can use SproutCore or Cappuccino accordingly.
SproutCore, the full-backed MVC framework that is used by Apple. (Think so at least.)
Cappuccino, another full-backed MVC framework.
Have you looked at Cappuccino? http://cappuccino.org/
I have not used but have heard many good things about it.
There is a new web development platform for Objective-C/Cocoa called Bombax. It sounds like exactly what you're looking for (it is designed to allow you to write entire web applications in Objective-C). Perhaps you could even combine it with Cappuccino. You can check it out at http://www.bombaxtic.com.
The closest you'll probably come to Objective-C web frameworks are either SOPE, or GNUStep, neither of which I have used, but ran across when I was deciding if I wanted to use Rails or something written in Objective-C for my web stuff. There's also ARJDatabase, which is kind of like Core Data, but not source compatible.
The bottom line is, unless you were very careful about how you wrote your code (i.e. wrote it with GNUStep in mind, didn't use anything Apple specific) you're probably going to have to do quite a bit of work anyway. And if you used Core Data at all, there's no way I know of to reuse that outside of a Mac App. And since it's not setup to be used my multiple simultaneous users, you wouldn't want to use that in a web app anyway. Bottom line, I went with Rails.
There is Frothkit - http://code.google.com/p/frothkit/ but it appears not to have been updated for a year.