3 ms·

So, what if you have a background process (running in the controller I assume) that updates data in the model periodically from somewhere. And at the same time

So, what if you have a background process (running in the controller I assume) that updates data in the model periodically from somewhere. And at the same time you have the user making changes to the model. How is consistency guaranteed here by having "UI updating itself from the model, by pulling data"? Maybe I have a different understanding of "consistency" but this might very well lead to undesired results if the logic of data updates isn't well-controlled. The developer needs to decide if the updates can happen arbitrarily or if some kind of transaction-model needs to be used, forcing the background process to wait during user interactions or the other way around, etc. I don't see how MVC solves that problem.

mpweiher 4y ago
This is not MVC's problem to solve. It also doesn't solve global warming. If you have unprotected multithreaded imperative updates of global data, nothing is consistent. Has nothing to do with MVC or no MVC. Actually having a consistent state to present to the UI is the model's problem. Oh, and for goodness sake, don't have any kind of async update process running in the controller. All this stuff belongs in the model. If you're doing that sort of stuff in the controller, I can see why you're having problems with concurrency. You're also almost certainly not doing MVC.
- valenterry 4y ago
  > If you have unprotected multithreaded imperative updates of global data, nothing is consistent. Yeah, but that is exactly what FRP solves (or strives to solve) and MVC does not give you on it's own (as you said). Ofc MVC can be used in combination with other techniques to gain consistency, but it doesn't provide it on its own, which is what I believe was implied by your original post. If you were just talking about the UI in isolation, then yeah, maybe MVC gives you that, but it misses the point of what FRP gives you.
  - mpweiher 4y ago
    > If you were just talking about the UI in isolation Comment I was replying to: >> But it's really cool to have UIs that are completely consistent. So yes, we kinda were talking about the UI, keeping that consistent (with the model, presumably). Hence MVC. Keeping the model consistent is another topic.
    - valenterry 4y ago
      I see - I guess the OP had something different in mind when they meant UI, not just the pure View. But point taken, I understand your response.

mpweiher 4y ago

This is not MVC's problem to solve. It also doesn't solve global warming. If you have unprotected multithreaded imperative updates of global data, nothing is consistent. Has nothing to do with MVC or no MVC. Actually having a consistent state to present to the UI is the model's problem. Oh, and for goodness sake, don't have any kind of async update process running in the controller. All this stuff belongs in the model. If you're doing that sort of stuff in the controller, I can see why you're having problems with concurrency. You're also almost certainly not doing MVC.

valenterry 4y ago
> If you have unprotected multithreaded imperative updates of global data, nothing is consistent. Yeah, but that is exactly what FRP solves (or strives to solve) and MVC does not give you on it's own (as you said). Ofc MVC can be used in combination with other techniques to gain consistency, but it doesn't provide it on its own, which is what I believe was implied by your original post. If you were just talking about the UI in isolation, then yeah, maybe MVC gives you that, but it misses the point of what FRP gives you.
- mpweiher 4y ago
  > If you were just talking about the UI in isolation Comment I was replying to: >> But it's really cool to have UIs that are completely consistent. So yes, we kinda were talking about the UI, keeping that consistent (with the model, presumably). Hence MVC. Keeping the model consistent is another topic.
  - valenterry 4y ago
    I see - I guess the OP had something different in mind when they meant UI, not just the pure View. But point taken, I understand your response.