Talk:Model–view–controller/Archive 2

In the MVC graph, missing connection from controller to view?
Either the graph is missing a connection, or the following description of the controller is wrong: "Accepts input and converts it to commands for the model or view."

Or, more likely, there are different variants of MVC.


 * Adding a date for the archive bot: 73.71.251.64 (talk) 02:43, 2 January 2021 (UTC)


 * The information flow from the controller to the view is often not needed. Still, one might update the figure. Theodore.norvell (talk) 07:57, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Why is Phoenix given special treatment?
The most recent edit added "The Phoenix (web framework) is written in Elixir, which runs on top of Erlang." to the second paragraph. Is there a reason that Phoenix should be explicitly mentioned, when no other MVC frameworks are mentioned in that section? I think we should just add Elixir to the list of languages that have MVC frameworks. Gmarmstrong (talk) 20:01, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and made the change in the mean time. Gmarmstrong (talk) 20:06, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Misleading picture.
The current picture is nice, but it currently suggests that the view "sees" the user. Perhaps the verb should be "displays to". Theodore.norvell (talk) 07:50, 18 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Please refer to the article FAQ, above. 172.58.35.77 (talk) 22:27, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

picture shows IMHO anti-pattern
According to my education the benefits of the MVC architecture come from the strict separation of model and view, e.g. view as well as model are only responsible for the APIs they expose to the controller. In the used picture is a connection between model and view which creates in my understanding an undesired cuppling. One of the citations at the bottom shows the following picture https://www.codeproject.com/KB/tips/ModelViewController/Figure4.gif which reflects my understanding of the MVC architecture. Ggoedel (talk) 08:31, 16 April 2021 (UTC) All the best Ggoedel


 * You talk about MVP not mvc — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.110.43.24 (talk)

Naked objects
- «Undid revision 1051357864 by Lenschulwitz talk) The ideas are relevant because they were laid out in the book as well.» - «‎Motivation:  Removed Richard Pawson book as it doesn't add to MVC article.»  - «‎Motivation:  New section»
 * Well look, I think it's important to mention Naked objects as a relevant "implementation" of MVC in some sense (what basically Kay says). At least I propose to put it elsewhere rather than keeping in the Motivation section if you don't mind. Regards.

AXO NOV (talk) ⚑ 10:13, 23 October 2021 (UTC)