[misterbwong]

If you squint a bit, the "original" MVC looks eerily similar to the one-way data flow pattern popularized by flux/redux.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/React_(software)#Unidirectiona...

edit: better link

[preommr]

If you squint almost of all software looks like MVC because it's essentially just, input(data)/processing(controller)/output(view).

[taberiand]

If you squint just a little more you'll notice a monad is just a monoid in the category of endofunctors.

[myaccountonhn]

Software is just a giant ORM.

[laurent123456]

In many ways it's really just MVC (at least the fat model / skinny controller style) except they renamed the elements:

- Dispatcher = Controller

- Store = Model

- View = View

And the actions are the messages sent from the user to the controller.

[DaiPlusPlus]

> MVC looks eerily similar to the one-way data flow pattern popularized by flux/redux.

I'm not seeing it.

From TFA:

> Views: A visual representation of a model. Views are updated by querying the model directly, and are notified by the model of updates. A view can update it’s model directly. A view should never know about things like keyboard and mouse events directly.

I'd like to emphasise the "a view can update its model directly" part - which is exactly what Redux and React are designed to prevent: when logic in a view can mutate the model (especially when the view _also_ depends on update notifications from the model to update itself) things get impossible to reason-about.

Instead, Redux/React is designed to force the view to "update" the model indirectly via actions and reducers.

Another tenet of Redux+React is that the model ("state" in Redux/React) is an immutable object-graph which is replaced on every update, whereas "classical" MVC requires a mutable, long-life'd model.

I feel the similarities only exist if you squint - and if you're lumping TFA's idea of MVC with React (and MVVM (groan...)) as ideas in opposition to how most people wrote/write RAD/VB6/WinForms by directly subclassing controls and overriding message-pump event-handler methods, which (I hope) everyone will agree is an approach that doesn't scale beyond building throwaway UIs.

[MrPatan]

It may be a matter of explaining it differently. Maybe just the names! But I never "got" MVC, and I got the one way data flow pattern straight away. Maybe I was just old enough to get the point that time around.

[PlunderBunny]

I'm glad I'm not the only one that doesn't get MVC. I can sort of understand it if I study a real example for a long time, but to doesn't stick. Sometimes I want to think that learning to code in the days of 8-bit computers is somehow incompatible with a lot of modern programming concepts, but maybe I'm just old and tired.

[breadwinner]

MVC is one-way. Some people think MVC is two-way data binding. That's MVVC actually.

[tracker1]

I think flux/redux is generally cleaner imo. But have had a tendency to think of it that way. MVC usually feels like spaghetti in contrast. And while Redux/Flux takes some mental overhead, I see so many fewer side effects in UIs that use the approach.

[gepardi]

If I squint, Redux is like a controller. Handles requests and response. It calls the DB, gets a response, updates state, then a view (React component) renders it.

[scrame]

the purest mvc demo is pong.

[dfox]

Indeed, what the various “reactive” frameworks do is in the end the idea behind MVC, although as they are web-based the implementation is ridiculously complex and the abstraction is very leaky.