PHP MVC: Do i really need a Controller? - php

My question is simple but (I guess) hard to answer:
Do I really need a complete Model-View-Controller design pattern in my PHP Website / Web-App?
I can't understand how a Controller could be useful with PHP since every PHP site is generated dynamically on every request. So after a site is generated by PHP, there is no way to let the View (the generated HTML site in the Browser) interact with the controller, since the Controller is on the server side and generated once for each site request, even if the request is AJAX...
Do I understand something completely wrong?
Why should I use any kind of MVC PHP Framework like Zend or Symphony?
EDIT:
For example lets assume, there should be a website to represent a list of customers in a table:
My Model would be a simple Class Customer on the server side that queries the database.
My View would be the generated HTML code that displays the Model (list of Customers).
And the controller? Is the controller only evaluating the GET or POST to call the correct method of the model?

Do I have understand something completely wrong?
Yes.
The MVC pattern is not for the browser. The browser sees HTML anyways. Whether this HTML is generated with C++, PHP, Java or whatever it doesn't matter. The browser doesn't care what design patterns were used to generate this HTML.
MVC is a design pattern to organize and separate responsibilities in your code. So it's not for the browser, it's for the developers writing the code. It's to create more maintainable code where you have a clear separation between your business logic (Model), the communication between the model and the view (Controller) and the UI (View).
Whether you should use the MVC pattern in your web site is a subjective question that I prefer not to answer as it will depend on many factors.

Short Answer
Yes. A controller will be responsible for preparing data to display for rendering and sometimes handle GET and POST requests that originating from your client. It should leave HTML generation to the view.
Long Answer
MVC can be very helpful in keeping applications maintainable and your code base sane. The pattern helps ensure separation of concerns of your code and in most cases will steer yor clear of 'spaghetti php' where your application logic is tangled with the HTML generation. A sample MVC setup below (there are sure to be many variations of this, but it gives you the idea):
Model
Responsible for fetching data from the database and saving changes when requested. One example might be a php object that represents a user with name and email fields.
Controller
Responsible for massaging and manipulating data and preparing it for display. The prepared data is passed to a view for rendering, with the view only needing to be aware of just the data it needs to render. For example: a controller may look at a query string to determine what item to fetch to render and combine this with several additional model queries to get additional data.
Often controllers will also be responsible for handling GET and POST requests that originate from your HTML client and applying some sort of manipulation back on your database. For example - handling form submits or AJAX requests for additional data.
View
The view is responsible for actually generating the HTML for display. In PHP, a view would often be a template file with minimal logic. For example, it might know how to loop over items provided to it from the controller or have some basic conditionals.
Application MVC vs PHP/Python/etc. MVC
From your other comments it sounds like you are familiar with using MVC in the context of a desktop or mobile application.
One of the main differences between MVC in the two is the granularity at which the controller is manipulating the view and responding to events.
For example, in a traditional application the controller might listen for click events originating from a button and respond appropriately.
When your doing server side html generation however, your controller is only 'alive' for a brief moment while its preparing html to ship out over the wire. This means that it can only do so much to setup and prepare the view for display.
Instead of listening traditional events from the UI, it can instead react in different ways to future GET and POST requests. For example, you may have a "save" button on a form trigger a POST request to your server (such as yourpage.php?action=save&value=blah). While handling this request your controller might access your models and apply changes, etc.

I realise that I am answering a very old questions, however, I do not believe that any other question has answered your initial concern appropriately, and this will hopefully add something useful for others who may stumble across this question in their learning about MVC.
Firstly, I will start by saying I read an interesting article about the confusion which exists within the PHP community about MVC and it is worth a read if you are asking this type of question.
Model-View-Confusion part 1: The View gets its own data from the Model
Secondly, I do not believe you have misunderstood anything at all, rather you have a better understanding of PHP and MVC which is allowing you to ask the question. Just because something has been defined and accepted by the community at large, it does not mean you should't question its use from time to time. And here is why.
There is NO memory between requests (except for SESSION state) within a PHP application. Every time a request is received the entire application fires up, processes the request and then shuts down i.e. there are no background application threads left running in the background (at least none which you can use within your application) where you could, theoretically, maintain application state. This is neither good, nor bad, it is just the way it is.
Understanding this, you can probably start to see what you are thinking is correct. Why would a View (which is allowed to access its own data from the Model) need a Controller? The simple answer, is that it doesn't. So for the pure display of a Model, the View is perfectly entitled to fetch its own data (via the Model) and it is actually the correct way to implement MVC.
But wait. Does this mean we don't need Controllers? Absolutely NOT! What we need to do is use a Controller for its appropriate purpose. In MVC, the Controller is responsible for interpreting user requests and asking the Model to change itself to meet the users request, following this, the Model can notify it's dependencies of the change and the View can update itself. Obviously, as you know, in the context of a PHP web application, the View is not just sitting and waiting for update notifications. So how can you achieve the notification?
This is where I believe MVC got hijacked. To notify the View it's Model has changed, we can simply direct them to the URL of the View which accesses the now updated Model. Great, but now we have introduced something into the Controller. Something which says, "Hey, I'm a controller but now I have knowledge of the location of the View." I think at this point, someone thought, "why do I bother redirecting the user? I have all the data which the View needs why don't I just send the data directly to the View?" and bang! Here we are.
So let's recap.
A View CAN access the Model directly within MVC
The Model houses the business logic for the Domain Objects
A Controller is not meant to provide the View access to the Model or act as any type of mediator
The Controller accepts user requests and makes changes to it's Model
A View is not the UI/HTML, that is where a Template is used
A practical example
To explain what I have been describing, we shall look at a simple, commonly found function within most websites today. Viewing the information of a single logged in user. We will leave many things out of our code here in order to demonstrate just the structure of the MVC approach.
Firstly lets assume we have a system where when we make a GET request for /user/51 it is mapped to our UserView with the appropriate dependencies being injected.
Lets define our classes.
// UserModel.php
class UserModel {
private $db;
public function __construct(DB $db) {
$this->db = $db;
}
public function findById($id) {
return $this->db->findById("user", $id);
}
}
// UserView.php
class UserView {
private $model;
private $template;
private $userId;
public function __construct(UserModel $model, Template $template) {
$this->model = $model;
$this->template = $template;
}
public function setUserId($userId) {
$this->userId = $userId;
}
public function render() {
$this->template->provide("user", $this->model->findById($this->userId));
return $this->template->render();
}
}
And that's it! You do not require the Controller at all. If however you need to make changes to the Model, you would do so via a Controller. This is MVC.
Disclaimer
I do not advocate that this approach is correct and any approach taken by any developer at any point in time is wrong. I strongly believe that the architecture of any system should reflect its needs and not any one particular style or approach where necessary. All I am trying to explain is that within MVC, a View is actually allowed to directly access it's own data, and the purpose of a Controller is not to mediate between View and Model, rather it is intended to accept user requests which require manipulation of a particular Model and to request the Model to perform such operations.

Related

PHP - Functions from the controller in view

I'm trying to learn MVC pattern, (but without the models because I don't see for what I can use them when I have the controllers).
So I want to display some content in my view. How do I do that?
This is my controller that takes care of index:
<?php
class Index extends Controller {
function __construct() {
parent::__construct();
$this->view->render('mainpage/index');
}
public function wynik($arg) {
echo $arg;
}
}
$klasa = new Index();
?>
And I want to call the function wynik($arg) in my view. How can I do this? My Controller library looks like this:
<?php
class Controller {
function __construct() {
$this->view = new View();
}
}
?>
And in views/mainpage/index.php I'm trying something like this:
<?php
echo $klasa->wynik('abc');
// tried this too:
$this->wynik('abc');
?>
But it doesn't work:
Notice: Undefined variable: klasa in C:\wamp\www\lvc\views\mainpage\index.php on line 2
and
Fatal error: Call to a member function wynik() on a non-object in C:\wamp\www\lvc\views\mainpage\index.php on line 2
This is View library:
<?php
class View {
function __construct() {
}
public function render($name, $noInclude = false) {
if ($noInclude == true) {
require 'views/' . $name . '.php';
} else {
require 'views/header.php';
require 'views/' . $name . '.php';
require 'views/footer.php';
}
}
}
?>
I was thinking - yeah, it searches for wynik() function in View() class, that's why it errors. I want the view to search through functions in my controller. How can I do this?
This code example is not working because the variable $klasa does not exist when you are trying to reference it. The initialization of the object done by calling "new Index()" must be completed first, then that value will be assigned to $klasa. Thus, your code is trying to access $klasa before it exists.
That said, I wouldn't continue to debug this problem. You are missing the point of MVC entirely, and until you understand it, you will not be able to code a controller and view that work well together. Spend time understanding MVC, not by implementing it yourself, but by using another system as an example.
If PHP is your flavor, try the Yii, CodeIgniter or Symphony Frameworks. If you like Python, try Django. If you like Ruby, try Rails. If you like C, learn Objective-C and try iOS.
The MVC model is very simple:
Model- This is where your data is stored.
View- This is how your data is represented to a user.
Controller- This is what your view talks to, so that it can act on the model.
Let's use a simple ice cream vending machine as an example. Assume the vending machine is one of those machines is like this one, where you can't see the items:
Model- The ACTUAL ice creams stored in the back. Lets say, 4 chocolate, 1 strawberry, 3 vanilla. The view and controller don't care how much of each ice cream are there. It is the model's job to keep track of that and make sure we don't have negative ice creams in slots, or other things that don't make sene, for example.
View- These are the little buttons showing what ice creams exist as choices. The view doesn't know or care how many ice creams are in the back, or what ice creams even exist. It simply shows the user something relating to the model, and it doesn't care what is in the model or how the model is structured.
Controller- When a user interacts with the view (that is, they push a button) the controller will take that input and run it by the model. The controller doesn't care how the model is structured, it doesn't know what is back there. All it knows is "When a user presses a button, I need to use the data in the model to make a decision based on that input". For example, when the user presses on a valid item that is in stock, the controller takes that input, runs it by the model, sees that it is ok and dispenses an ice cream. When the user presses on an invalid item that is not in stock, the controller takes that input, runs it by the model, sees that it is out of stock, and tells the view to display an error.
If you get this basic concept down, MVC as a whole will make a lot more sense and speed up dev time dramatically. Understanding MVC is probably one of the more important things for a budding web/mobile developer right now, as most popular web frameworks are based on it (Django, Rails, Yii/CodeIgniter/Symphony), as well as iOS.
MVC is a design patter which combines two layers:
Model layer
Presentation layer
If your application does not have model layer (which contains all the domain business logic), then there is no MVC.
Presentation layer is made mostly from two groups of structures: views and controllers.
controllers : responsible for reacting to user's input and, based on that, changing the state of model layer and view.
views : responsible for the display(or presentation) logic, based information, that view has received from model layer. Based on this information views choose to appropriate response - it can be either just a HTTP header or HTML file, rendered from multiple template or formated JSON/XML data.
But you do not really have Views either. What you call "view" is actually are simple PHP templates.
As for the view accessing controller's methods, it is against all the principles in MVC and MVC-inspired patterns. View is a separate entity, which acquires data from model layer and has the state changed by controllers.
In classical MVC and Model2 MVC patterns the view is active. It requests the information directly from the model layer. Whereas in MVP and MVVM patterns the view is passive and information from model layer is provided by controllers (though in these patterns they are called "presenters" and "viewmodels" respectively).
Views do not use controllers.
Please, do some research before you start throwing terms around just because you think, that it is the latest thing.
Read the following materials:
GUI Architectures
MVC in PHP part 1: Hello World
Model-View-Confusion part 1: Why the model is accessed by the view in MVC
A Description of the Model-View-Controller User Interface Paradigm in the Smalltalk-80 System
How should a model be structured in MVC?
Instead of MVC and not really knowing why and so on, I suggest you another concept called Transaction Script that also work very well with a Frontend Controller or an Application Controller.
Working with Transaction Scripts allows you to get more familiar with OOP while you also benefit from some application structure without the overhead and problems that a misunderstood MVC does carry.
For example within a transaction script object, everything can access the functions of that a transaction. Your libraries, your view and everything else (the model).
Then you will see things growing. But forget Codeigniter and similar, write this from scratch (don't mimic things), you'll learn more and you will have more efficient code.
And you will have it your way, which is great for learning.
For the libraries, just fetch stuff from the Packagist and Pear repositories you will not have many wishes left.
I am not going to add code samples here, but I hope what I say will help you look in the right direction. LVC (Library, View, Controller) is just you changing one name(Model) to another (Library) Doesnt really matter at all, you are still using MVC, you just happen to call your Model a Library. This is a vast topic, but I am only trying to make you see the use of having models and offloading code into that instead of in controllers.
The way to look at it is like this:
Typically controllers should only perform following - check requests, invoke Model(In your case Library) methods, which process those requests, and take those results and pass to the view to render. Think of each function in a controller to be an endpoint URL that the user can type in the address bar and access.
Think you have a function like profile($user_id) in a controller called user, to show user profile and the user accesses it using the url www.mydomain/user/profile/1234.This is all very fine. But what happens if you start throwing in all kinds of utility functions inside this controller like say, strip_all_zeroes(). It becomes bad if the user can access this using mydomain.com/user/strip_all_zeroes, right? It might start throwing all kinds of warnings,errors, or even expose sensitive data..That is where models come in. They can be used to create all kinds of helper functions, whole data classes as required..
Of course this is very broad, over-simplified and not totally accurate, but I hope you get the idea..

Implementing MVP in Web Applications

As I understand it, MVP is a derivative of MVC where the Model and the View are loosely or completely decoupled, and the Presenter replaces the Controller and acts as the bridge between the View and the Model. This pattern seems more appropriate than traditional MVC in web applications (whether or not that is true is not the subject of this question, so please refrain from going down that direction).
My problem is in implementing the various MVP pieces in PHP, using a passive view. Here is my current flow of things:
The PHP script sets up an autoloader and a router. To me, this means whatever view was in existence send an event of some kind to the server.
The router then determines which presenter should be used based on the request.
Here be dragons. The Presenter acts as the bridge between the View and the Model and should take a View and a Model as dependencies so it can easily be tested. That means I need to know what model and view I should be using before the presenter is created.
The presenter seems to be the class that knows what Model and what View it needs, so how can I move that logic out of the presenter? I understand that the generic pattern to use is a factory, I just can't seem to understand how to implement it in this case.
Perhaps I am doing this all wrong. Maybe I've been coding for too long of a stretch and am experiencing mind warp. Regardless of why I can't seem to understand how to solve this problem, I'll accept any guidance.
Not 100% sure I know what you're asking. You are right that you load the appropriate controller based on the request. That controller is typically associated with a model and a view.
Let's say you have a URL that looks like: http://www.example.com/test/view/1
It would be fairly standard to load the Test controller, call the method view pass it the argument 1. So let's assume you have:
TestController.php
TestModel.php
test.php (view)
When the TestController loads it includes the model, TestModel, where your "data stuff" goes (I think you understand that). So for this example, let's say view wants to load the last 5 posts from the user with id 1. So in TestController.php:
function view($arg)
{
$userID = $arg;
$posts = $this->model->loadPosts($userID);
$this->render('test', $posts); // outputs the HTML in test.php
}
And in test.php, you can loop through $posts and output it however you choose.
It seems like you already know how this stuff works though, which is why I am confused as to what you're asking. Does this clear up anything?
I find it useful to think of Web Apps in terms of states and state transitions. the application is in a particular state, it's "at" a View, some HTML was with the aid of the associated Presenter from data in the Model and rendered to the browser . The user takes an action and this is going to move our app to a new state. So we are moving from one View/Presenter pair to another. In my mind the Model is a longer lived, evolving thing, I don't see us getting a new Model for each transition.
So you have PresenterA, responsible for responding to events in ViewA.
PresenterA receives some event, performs some work that may result in Model changes, and then decides which View to go to, say ViewB. ViewB can create its Presenter. As per the Wikipedia example (not PHP I realize, but the principle is clear):
public class DomainView: IDomainView
{
private IDomainPresenter domainPresenter;
public DomainView() // Constructor
{
this.domainPresenter = new ConcreteDomainPresenter(this);
}
}
In effect the Presenter is the creator of the next View/Presenter pair. If you have more complex logic replace the explicit constructor
new ConcreteDomainPresenter(this);
with a factory, working with View and Model information.

MVC for dummies: why does controller have to send anything to views?

If I get this right than function of the Controller is processing POST data and technically making changes to the state of the application (e.g. DB) via Model.
As far as I understand, View also gets data from the Model.
So this is how I understand the workflow:
Client request --> App Front Controller --> (if method = POST --> Controller) --> View --> back to Client
Here Model is used by Controller to read and write data and by View to read data.
So controller is not used every time the page is loaded, in fact, only when app data is added/updated. Most of the times Controller is bypassed.
Thus, how come almost every resource about MVC is talking about Controller sending data to views?
I am trying to write an app using MVC-like pattern. So in my app views always get data for the page from the Model. When Model is updated, I add specific model update time to Memcache. At runtime each View looks up last update time(s) of related model(s) and last time cache for this view was generated. If model was updated before cache was saved, view reads cache, otherwise re-renders based on updated model.
The controller is responsible for presenting views based on the data that is requested. It's there so neither the model nor the view need to know about the request. Yes, the view gets data from the model, but not always directly; the controller may have to make some decisions as well depending on the request.
It's something like having waiters in a restaurant so they can take orders from and serve dishes to customers. It's not the chefs who bring out the meals after preparing them; it's the waiters. It's not the customers who go to the kitchen asking for meals; it's the waiters who take their orders then let the chefs know what to prepare for whom. In the same way, the controller is there to handle client requests, whatever their nature may be. It's a very rough comparison though, but I hope you get the picture.
Unless I misinterpreted your question: The problem is with the view accessing the model directly. That's not supposed to happen as it defeats the reason for the MVC pattern. The view shouldn't know anything about the model itself, so the model can be exchanged for something else - the controller should supply the data (at most times it a flattened or projected way) to the view.
If I did: The controller is never bypassed. Just because it doesn't do anything with the data, doesn't mean it isn't needed - it provides a layer of abstraction between model and view. The point is to be able to exchange the model without having to adjust the view.
The controller is never bypassed as it is required to instruct which views are shown and what data (if any) is used in those views. Each get or post request to an MVC site uses the controller to control what is shown or collected to/from the client.
At its core MVC is used to separate concerns. The model works with the data, the views handle presentation and the controller provides the logic between the two.
If you are a person that learn faster by getter hands dirty with codes or looking to something visual , like me ....
I will suggest you to follow the tutorial in railsforzombies.org . It pretty much explain all the basic using rails , including MVC. In the tutorial , It mention that if you put all those logic in view , It will be messy. The code will sux a little bit because the guys that want to use your code will be confused with codes. By putting all the logic in controller and output it in view. It will be very clear for the person that look into your codes.

			
				
Usually Controller uses Model, and passes proccessed data to View. View shouldn't see Model. Main goal is - to keep View separately from Model!
MVC for dummies: why does controller
have to send anything to views?
This is the main point of MVC: to create loose coupling by separating and distinguishing the application's concerns. You have the View, Model, and Controller doing specific tasks.
Why the need for separation because it's hard to debug and fix a one gigantic godzilla app. Imagine fixing a car made from stone. There are no bolts. Everything is chiseled from a big rock. How hard is fixing that if you just want to change the wheels. You will need to chisel out the rock itself.
The main job of the controller is to handle requests and display the appropriate view. That it's job. It's like asking why does the mailman need to send the mail. Because that's his job.

General on mvc... should controller pass data to view or view should grab it directly from model?

I’m trying to learn and fully understand mvc pattern and learn php at the same time. I decided to built basic mvc framework that I could use on various projects later on. Having read lots of posts in here regarding mvc and coupling between models/views/controllers I’m a bit lost.. At the moment my understanding is that in web application controllers deal with coming request from browser and, if necessary, calls methods on model classes telling models to change its state. Then controller instantiate appropriate view class that will be responsible for displaying interface.
Here's the bit I don’t understand...
Now should controller pass appropriate model object to view and view should pull out all the data from model when needed?
Or controller should grab data from model and pass it to view, possibly wrapping it all into single wrapper object that view will access and grab data from there?
Or view should simply instantiate appropriate model when needed and pull out data directly from model object?
From what I read here
http://www.phpwact.org/pattern/model_view_controller
I’d lean towards the 3rd option where controller doesn’t pass anything to view and view instantiates model it needs. This is because:
view and controller should have same access to model
controller shouldn’t act simply as mediator in between view and model.
Is there really one correct way to do it or it rather depends on project? Also what approach would you recommend to someone who has decent understanding of OOP but is relatively new to php and not too clear on mvc architecture. Or maybe I should go with whatever seems right to me and learn from my mistakes (would like to avoid this one though ;)?
Now, please let me know if my question is not clear will try to better explain then.. Also I read lots of posts on stackoverflow and numerous articles on different sites, but still would appreciate help so thanks in advance for all answers.
Personally, I've always been a proponent of #2. The view shouldn't care about the model. The view shouldn't have any processing at all for that matter. It should do what it's supposed to do, format data.
The basic flow of control should be thus: The controller recieves a request from a browser. It processes the request, decides what data is needed, and retrieves it from the model/s. It then passes the data into the view which format the data and displays it.
As an extension, user input is processed inside the controller, and saved into a model if needed, then feedback is fed into a view, etc. The key point to take away is that processing happens inside the controller.
Personally, I've always been a proponent of #3. The view shouldn't care about the controller. The view shouldn't have any dependency on the controller for that matter. It should do what it's supposed to do, show a view of the model.
The basic flow of control should be thus: The controller receives a request from a browser. It makes any updates to the model, that is relevant, and then selects a view. The control is then passed to the view, which gets data from the model and renders it.
As an extension, user input can be consider part of the model, and both the controller and the view may read from it. The key point to take away is that Controller and View should have no dependency on each other. That's why the pattern is called MVC.
Now, personally, I find MVC a bit too tedious, and so I usually conflate Controller and View more than this. But then that isn't really MVC.
Web MVC and Desktop MVC are two very different beasts.
In Web MVC, a link in a View calls a method on a Controller, which updates a Model, and then redirects to an appropiate View, which opens up a Model and shows what it needs.
In a Desktop MVC, option 3 is wrong because both the view and the model should use the same reference. In Web, there's no choice.
Option number 2 is not MVC. It's MVP, wherein the Presenter is a mediator.
A Controller has Write-Access to a Model; a View has only Read access.
This is a very interesting question.
From my experience most implementations in php assign a model variable to the view:
$this->view->my_property = $modelObj->property
This is common practice.
The common reasoning for this is that if you send the object then you can call methods that modify the object from the view.
//in the controller file
$this->view->myObject = $modelObj;
//in the view file, you could call an object modifying method
$this->myObject->delete();
And modifying the model from the view is considered bad practice. Some people thing that they don't want their designers being able to call model modifying methods from the view.
That being said. I don't agree with the common practice and tend to assign the whole object to the view and display it from there. And just discipline my self to not make operations there.
And a third option is to assign the whole object to the view. but some how in the objects disable methods when they are called from the view.
I think this is just a generic argue about what is better "push" or "pull" model. There is no "absolutely" best solution.
I had a very similar question earlier. I find helpful to think of it as follows:
MVC
Model -- Data store, alerts Views of changes
View -- Displays model, provides hooks for user interaction
Controller -- Handles user input
You would use MVC more often in non-web apps, where lots of classes are interacting with eachother simultaneous.
In a web application MVC means MVT (Model-View-Template)
Model -- Strictly a data store, typically an ORM solution
View -- Handles web requests, provides for user input/output
Template -- Actually displays content (HTML, Javascript, etc.)
So in a web application the presentation is handled in the Template, the logic behind the application is handled in the View (or classes called by the view), and the model is responsible for holding data.
The reason why so many developers today can't get the knock of MVC is because the abbreviation of MVC was incorrectly stated from day one when it arrived into software development, but the concept is correct back then and also today. Since I am from the old school, let me explain it for you; when you are creating an object you first create a Model so the customer can View it, once it is approved you will have full Control on how the object is going to be made. That's how it is to this day in product manufacturing.
In today’s web application development such term should be VCM. Why! You View what's on the web browser, and then you click a button for action, that is known as the Controller. The controller alerts the Model, which is the instruction or logic to produce a result (that is your script). The result is then sent back to the user for viewing. In software engineering, you can refer to it as CMV; because the user won't able to view anything until the apps is compiled and installed. So we will need a Controlling device (PC); the OS as the Model and a monitor to View the results. If you can understand those concepts, MVC should start to look much more appetizing. I hope this concept will help someone to understand MVC.
I tend toward having the controller act as an intermediary between the model and the view, but generally this is literally a single line of code that connects the three together. If your model, view, and controller are properly decoupled it should make very little difference which you use.

Zend_Framework- Where to Place $_GET and $_POST (HTTP Request) handling?

I recently read this post which led to a series of other posts that all seem to suggest the same idea: Models do everything, the View should be able to communicate directly with the model and vice versa all while the Controller stays out of the way. However, all of the examples shown are fairly simplistic and none really show an example of how anyone has tried to implement full handling of of a request / response cycle, which got me to wondering "should the model be responsible for handling the request (ie $_GET, $_POST, etc) itself?" and "should the controller only operate as a pass-through to instantiate the necessary model(s) and pass the model(s) to the view?". (In fact I found one example taken the extreme of embedding a Zend_Form object in the model)
From my reading of what Fowler says about MVC and just controller's in general it seems at first glance that the thinner the controller layer the better. But then I took the time to back through and study what he says about both MVC and Front Controller (which just muddies the waters because both patterns define controllers) and now my instincts suggest that Zend_Framework in implementing both of these patterns, has actually created a composite object that performs the functions of a Controller in MVC and those of a Command object in Front Controller (or some such).
So I'm wondering what the general opinions would be of others who have implemented similar patterns in their apps - do you handle the request entirely within the controller layer or do you make the model aware of the request and handle parameters directly within the model?
My first thought is to avoid handling any sort of request in the model. That is the job of the controller. Here is why: suppose you have a model that does handle your requests (GET or POST). That structure will likely work well initially. Now, suppose you want to add some sort of AJAX functionality or put up a service interface to your system. Now that you accept more than simple GET/POST, i.e. JSON or XML, your model will have to distinguish between each request type and know how to parse them. I believe that destroys a lot of simplicity and clarity of the model code. I agree that the controller layer should be thin, but it should also have a role and an expertise. For me a controllers expertise is to:
Handle incoming requests
Delivery data to the model
Request/accept data from the model
Pass the data's model to the view
I vacillate on how much the view should know about the model. Some people recommend the model go straight into the view, but I think that is fragile coupling. It frequently leads to logic in the view. Also, if you are working on a project where the team members working on the view are not as programming savvy as the main developers it puts a large burden on them to keep up with changes. I tend to package the data I hand to my views in a neutral structure instead of handing over the full models.
My interpretation of MVC is mostly pragmatic. The model's job is to model the domain you are working on and should not care where the data comes from. I frequently structure model code with the assumption that it could be used outside of the web application in perhaps a command line application or a desktop application. That sort of union rarely happens, but it leads to clear purpose of each layer. The controllers job is to move data between involved parties, be they client requests, the models, or the view. The controller should have very little domain logic, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have any code. Finally, the view should just look pretty. Hope that helps.
handling the user instructions/input (like HTTP requests) is the job of the controller. model is for working/manipulating/fetching the data and view is for showing the results to user. this means that connection between the view and the model is duty of a controller most of times.

Categories