Comments on: Mamoo: Client-side MVC from Motionbox

By: Ben Galbraith

Ben Galbraith — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:07:28 +0000

@tobowers: Sorry about misspelling it as “Maboo”; fixed it just now.

By: temsa

temsa — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 13:25:18 +0000

Seems complicated to me, and not very powerful .

Model should just be a hashmap or a pojo, View should not been embedded in the code and Controller should draw the view, observe its events, and publish the model to the view for it to render.

We can do MVC in a much easier and powerful way (have a look at ArchetypeJS or JavascriptMVC…)

By: tobowers

tobowers — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 12:40:33 +0000

Hi,

One… it’s “Mamoo.” :-) No hard feelings.

Sixtyseconds – this was created for our “Motionbox Express Uploader (MXU).” We have tons of events and dom elements that get updated very frequently (upload progress, etc.). These all need to individually respond to user events too. It becomes a complex problem to solve over and over again for various types of objects. Mamoo was created very specifically to solve that problem.

By: sixtyseconds

sixtyseconds — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 11:37:42 +0000

*event even

By: sixtyseconds

sixtyseconds — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 11:36:46 +0000

It looks like a lot of work has gone into Mamoo, which I respect. Isn’t it over-complicating the problem though? None of this stuff is beyond a little even delegation. And what is the cost of learning a whole MVC framework for the simple means of automated, retrospective DOM updating?

I didn’t even get the feeling that what was being done (in the screencast) was all that abstract and reusable…