Comments on: Backbone.js Is Not An MVC Framework

By: jraede

jraede — Sun, 21 Apr 2013 19:11:00 +0000

The Backbone.View IS the controller. It takes information from the model or collection and displays it on the ACTUAL view, which is the DOM. It literally does exactly what any controller in any MVC framework does, it is just poorly named. View Controller would be more appropriate.

Think of it like iOS. The view controllers do what backbone views do. The nibs are the equivalent of DOM elements.

By: Javier Lorenzana

Javier Lorenzana — Mon, 08 Apr 2013 23:39:00 +0000

I have to say – tomatto, tomato. This whole thing pretty much misses the point of what MVC is meant to accomplish; I love being specific, but this is ridiculous.

Backbone.js makes an MVC block out of a piece of your page.

As mentioned above, there’s no MVC framework for web apps which complies entirely with the behaviour you’d expect from a native app – nor do they need to.

They’re still called MVC because, given the architecture of the system in which they run, REST, they are still providing the separation and interaction that makes MVC useful. Which is exactly what Backbone.js does on the system in which it runs – the browser.

Every single JS “MVC” framework out there adapts the pattern in their own way. Tomatto, tomato. If I have my model separated from the data presentation and control interface, and the actions those controls trigger upon my model, then I call it MVC.

By: Davide Callegari

Davide Callegari — Sat, 10 Nov 2012 22:32:00 +0000

Hi,

I know this is an old post but I found it during my googling and I’d like to give my thoughts on it.

I find Backbone appealing because I come from a Django background and I find it very similar to it, since Django has its own router (a urlpattern tuple), a set of templates, views that are responsible for rendering a template and models.

Django refers to itself not strictly an MVC but MTV (Model-Template-View), which is a bit different but from the same “family” of frameworks.

By: Josh Habdas

Josh Habdas — Tue, 06 Nov 2012 00:23:00 +0000

By now the MVW (Model-View-Whatever) has been coined. More patterns have emerged and the carrot, still dangling, seems to be isomorphic javascript:

http://blog.nodejitsu.com/scaling-isomorphic-javascript-code

By: Guest

Guest — Tue, 06 Nov 2012 00:17:00 +0000

By now the term MVW (Model-View-Whatever) has already been coined and the carrot that is isomorphic javascript, or JS that runs both on the client and server, is furiously being sought after. Will Flatiron be the first one to the finish line?

http://blog.nodejitsu.com/scaling-isomorphic-javascript-code

By: Guest

Guest — Tue, 06 Nov 2012 00:16:00 +0000

http://blog.nodejitsu.com/scaling-isomorphic-javascript-code

By: Vlad

Vlad — Sat, 13 Oct 2012 18:38:00 +0000

cool :)

By: Derick Bailey

Derick Bailey — Sat, 13 Oct 2012 18:37:00 +0000

Yes, you’re correct. I meant to say “views”. Fixed. Thanks! :)

By: Vlad

Vlad — Sat, 13 Oct 2012 18:34:00 +0000

Hi Derick!
I have 1 small question/suggestion. When you say

“A router is not a controller. It’s a router. A view is not a controller.
It’s a view. Yes, both routers and controllers share some of what a
traditional MVC framework would call a controller”

I think the 5th sentence should be corrected to “yes, both routers and VIEWS share some…”.

Or did you really mean “controller” as old name of router in Backbone?

By: Matt Briggs

Matt Briggs — Thu, 11 Oct 2012 15:02:00 +0000

In MVC, a view wires itself to the controller, and changes as the controller changes. The controller has no reference to the view. In MVP, the presenter reaches into the view and messes with it, and can also talk to other presenters.

I don’t think these discussions are super important, but I would highly recommend reading http://martinfowler.com/eaaDev/uiArchs.html