MVC pattern (need view object in model)

Question

I'm using the MVC pattern in my application.

Now I need the view object in a model.

I don't want to add the view as a parameter for my function in the model (since I need it in other functions as well). And I don't want to keep on passing it.

Should a add the view as an attribute for the constructor of the model?

Is there another way? Shouldn't I be needing the view object in the model in the first place?

What would be the preferred way of doing it?

Example:

Controller

function someAction()
{
    $somemodel->add();
}

Model

class SomeModel()
{
    function add()
    {
        if ($view->user) {
            // do stuff
            $this->mail();
        } else {
            // do other stuff
        }
    }

    function mail()
    {
        Mailer::send($view->user->email, $this->getitems(), $view->layout);
    }

    function getitems()
    {
        return Items::getitems($view->user);
    }
}

Could you describe the problem rather than the solution you're trying to get working? As MVC is supposed to separate the view from the model (and the controller) and it seems there may be a better way. — Martin Bean
– Martin Bean, Commented Nov 4, 2011 at 0:05
@MartinBean: I need to access view variables in my model. The above is not a solution but is the problem. — PeeHaa
– PeeHaa, Commented Nov 4, 2011 at 0:09
why would you want to access your view variables within your model? This smells to me like something being out of its place... — maraspin
– maraspin, Commented Nov 4, 2011 at 0:59

netcoder · Accepted Answer · 2011-11-04 00:34:31Z

5

If you're really doing MVC, then you won't need the view in the model, because only the controller should have access to the view.

Looking at the code you've provided, I can tell one thing: the add() method should not reference $view in any way (even for accessing its properties). Instead, the model should be provided with the $view->user value from the controller. The same goes for the mail() method.

Consider fixing those issues. Otherwise, you'll get into something worse later on.

edited Nov 4, 2011 at 0:34

netcoder

68k19 gold badges129 silver badges142 bronze badges

answered Nov 4, 2011 at 0:11

Artak

2,92723 silver badges32 bronze badges

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

1 Comment

maraspin Over a year ago

sound advice, I totally second it. Your model entities are what you pass around. IMHO the view object should be considered just as a repository for all items that you'll want to display. Something else and not the view shall be used for all other purposes. Just my 2cc.

dispake · Accepted Answer · 2011-11-04 00:19:00Z

1

The model should be separate from the view. So, as mkArtak said, the controller should be the only thing that communicates with the view. Which then passes only the necessary information to the model.

As for the model, it should really only deal with the information that it understands.

i.e. if you had a Car model... you don't want to build it dependent on it's factory. If you did, you would have to change your code if you wanted to build it in different factory.

answered Nov 4, 2011 at 0:19

dispake

3,3372 gold badges21 silver badges22 bronze badges

Comments

Mike Purcell · Accepted Answer · 2011-11-04 00:19:16Z

1

The controller is where you 'bake' everything prepare for render. By bake I mean you consider any passed in $_REQUEST params, make model API calls to get the data you need, and set template variables to be rendered. Your action, at the end of this process should make a call to a template (view) you choose in order to render the 'baked' template variables.

answered Nov 4, 2011 at 0:19

Mike Purcell

20k10 gold badges54 silver badges94 bronze badges

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

MVC pattern (need view object in model)

3 Answers 3

1 Comment

Comments

Comments

Your Answer

Hot Network Questions

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

3 Answers 3

1 Comment

Comments

Comments

Your Answer

Sign up or log in

Post as a guest

Related