问题
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?
回答1:
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.
回答2:
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.
来源：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/432435/zend-framework-where-to-place-get-and-post-http-request-handling