The ASP.NET MVC Framework is essentially the Microsoft's attempt to create an ASP.NET programming environment centered around the MVC pattern. For the time being (nobody can reasonably foresee future evolutions), the MVC Framework should be considered an alternative to Web Forms. To some extent, the MVC Framework and Web Forms have in common more or less what cars and motorcycles share. Both can take you somewhere else, but with different speed, comfort, sense of freedom, size of the trunk.
The MVC Framework doesn't support classic postbacks and viewstate and doesn't consider any URL as the endpoint to a physical server file to parse and compile to a class. In ASP.NET, you have a 1:1 correspondence between a URL and a resource. The only exception to this rule is when you use completely custom HTTP handlers bound to a particular path.
In the MVC Framework, a URL is seen as the mean to address a logical server resource, but not necessarily an ASPX file to parse. So the URLs employed by the pages of an MVC Framework application have a custom format that the application itself mandates. In the end, the MVC Framework employs a centralized HTTP handler that recognizes an application-specific syntax for links. In addition, each addressable resource exposes a well-known set of operations and a uniform interface for executing operations.
Have you ever heard about Representational State Transfer, or REST for short?
Well, REST is an architectural pattern that defines how network resources should be defined and addressed in order to gain shorter response times, clear separation of concerns between the front-end and back-end of a networked system. REST is based on three following principles:
- An application expresses its state and implements its functionality by acting on logical resources
- Each resource is addressed using a specific URL syntax
- All addressable resources feature a contracted set of operations
As you can see, the MVC Framework fulfills it entirely.
So here's an alternate way of looking at the MVC Framework. It is an ASP.NET framework that performs data exchange by using a REST model versus the postback model of classic ASP.NET. Each page is split into two distinct components -controller and view - that operate over the same model of data. This is opposed to the classic code-behind model where no barrier is set that forces you to think in terms of separation of concerns and controllers and views. However, by keeping the code-behind class as thin as possible, and designing the business layer appropriately, a good developer could achieve separation of concerns even without adopting MVC and its overhead. MVC, however, is a model superior to a properly-done code-behind for its inherent support for test-driven development.
The figure below summarizes my perspective of classic ASP.NET and the MVC Framework.
Contrasting ASP.NET and the MVC Framework
While MVC is definitely a key part of the framework, I wouldn't consider it is the most compelling part. REST is a possible alternative to the postback model, whereas MVC is an alternative to code-behind.
source :www.dotnetslackers.com
