MVC as opposed to MVP

[Ben]

Hi,

I always thought that MVP (Model-View-Presenter) was a newer
design than MVC ((Model-View-Controller), so I assumed that as
time goes by, more and more frameworks would be implemented
using the MVP pattern. But instead, the opposite is happening.
All the major frameworks are MVC based (like Spring.net, ASP.NET MVC et.)
and virtually no major framework is based on MVP.
What gives? Is there anything wrong with the MVP pattern? Or is it just a
matter
of choosing the right design for the task?

Thanks,
Ben

 

[christery]

Hi,

I always thought that MVP (Model-View-Presenter) was a newer
design than MVC ((Model-View-Controller),

Kidding, right... Most Valued.... what do I know... Person..
But it might be Mighty-Violent-Prisoner...

//CY

 

[Ben]

and now seriously...

 

[Chris Crowther MBCS]

and now seriously...

It could just be a case of people working with what they're used to.
Although to be honest I have a hard time telling the difference between
MVP and MVC sometimes, which could be another factor. So far as I can
tell one of the major difference between the two patterns is that MVP
has a much more rigid separation of the View and the Model.

 

[Jeff Louie]

Ben... My impression is that the general consensus is that in the MVP
architecture, the Model is isolated from the View and vice-versa. In the
SmallTalk MVC architecture the Model updates the View using the Observer
pattern. It may help to think of three basic approaches:

M-VC --> Emphasizes unit testability and independence of the Model
MVC --> Emphasizes separation of concerns
mCv/MVP --> Emphasis is on an intermediate Controller/Presenter that
owns
the Model and View and isolates the Model from the View

MVC is a SmallTalk architecture, but it is often used as generic for a
three part
architecture with an emphasis on separation of concerns.

M-VC is the old Unix architecture of INTERFACE-ENGINE

Regards,
Jeff