"Rick Elbers" <ri*********@chello.nl> a écrit dans le message de news:
81********************************@4ax.com...
| >MVP may be a pattern, but it can be implemented by a framework that can
be
| >re-used time and time again. True Design Patterns are usually coding
| >guidelines that have to be written anew for every use; my MVP framework
is a
| >standard code library that can be extended, but that doesn't need
re-writing
| >every time I use it.
|
| Therefore it has nothing to do with a framework.
A framework is a library of code that can be used over and over again
without having to recode it, as opposed to a pattern which must be coded
every time.
| Of course for .net you have to make a few extensions to the
| framework to make it support true MVP. That could be worthwhile.
You can start by working from the essential MVP requirements and then write
a framework based on that pattern. Certainly, MVP could be described as a
pattern but when it is executed in a particular programming environment, it
then becomes a framework.
| Apart from that to the original question: Their are quit a few domain
| specific design patterns for sometimes really difficult domain
| specific problems mostly put together in pattern catalogs but I never
| ever see anyone in c# refer to those highly specific patterns or
| domains.
If patterns are domain specific, it is unlikely that they will appear in too
many catalogues as catalogues are usually generic by their nature.
| Interesting, what kind of domain specific frameworks are written in c#
| ?
I would suppose that, as C# is an all-purpose programming language, that you
could write whatever frameworks that you required. I certainly haven't found
any domain that I could not code in C#.
| 99% of what i see is application development, 90 % of which
| esssentially 2-tier administrative. I havent seen something "smart" in
| c# applications for a long time. That doesnt mean that its easy to
| make good user interfaces for dataentry and dataview, but that the
| applications itself are merely trackers of business processes and
| rather dumb in that they dont give added value to the process besides
| persistence and overview. OO design then is merely waste of time and
| effort.
I don't understand your line of argument here, how does the type of
application invalidate the use of good OO design principles ? Good OO
applications ensure that business logic is appropriately allocated to the
classes that are responsible for the management of the data related to that
business logic; instead of the standard data in a datbase, somle logic in
stored procs and the rest in the GUI.
I have consulted for many companies that have written "simple" "non-OO"
applications that have ended up tying themselves in knots trying to avoid OO
and ending up with unmaintainable, un-upgradable applications. Once they
enforce OO design principles, all of a sudden they end up with applications
that are easy to maintain, debug and upgrade and that have measurably less
bugs at release date.
| I am looking for smart frameworks or applications in c# in which
| processes can really be automated or get a quality boost by the
| applications..do you know any( MVP as variant of MVC is a very bad
| call their since its mostly and most strongly used in administrative
| apps or at least in the less interesting part of smart applications ).
I have used MVP in a variety of different applications. The purpose of MVP
is to allow the decoupling of the UI layer from the business layer,
regardless of the business domain. I have used MVP to implement the UI for
an application that monitors in real-time, the interaction between injection
moulding machines and scheduling software using file transfer messaging
protocol.
Does that count as an interesting domain ?
Joanna
--
Joanna Carter [TeamB]
Consultant Software Engineer
