ansaurus

Question

ASP.Net MVC View and Controller file structure

Answer 1

+2 A:

I think they would want you to have

Views/About/Index.aspx

which /Views/AboutController Index() would point to

Routing Example:

in Global.asax:

protected void Application_Start()
{
    MyRoutes.RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes);         
}

then in the MyRoutes class:

public class MyRoutes
{
     internal static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes)
     {
         // add routes
     }
}

hunter 2010-03-29 20:11:19

You could always add a Route that would point "/About.aspx" to "/Views/Home/About.aspx"

hunter 2010-03-29 20:12:13

Yes, I can do this, But in case of large projects, my global.asx.cs file will be very big. Any better alternative ?

Jit 2010-03-29 20:23:52

Once you come up with all of the patterns you would need it's not so bad. Also, you don't have to put all of this into the global.asax. I put an example of using another class to register your routes.

hunter 2010-03-30 12:57:19

Answer 2

+1 A:

You should probably look at the basic tutorials for the ASP.Net MVC framework. It operates under several conventions - and one of the biggest conventions is the file naming and folder structure.

While the structure you like may be good for simple projects or your personal preference, it's not ideal for large projects. You need to either follow the convention, or learn enough about the framework so you can override the behavior of it.

womp 2010-03-29 20:14:21

Actually I am thinking on Large project point of view. Let's say I have a folder Sales under view and then I have 10 .aspx files(One.aspx,Two.aspx...Ten.aspx) under sales folder. This case I have to implement all the controller logic under SalesController.cs file. Just think of how wrong practice is it ? If it gives the option like OneController.cs, TwoController.cs then it will be much better of clear separation of logic.Any idea to solve this issue?

Jit 2010-03-29 20:22:07

That's a very, very bad separation of logic. You're proposing a convention where the requested view file is dictating the controller instantiation, which is exactly opposite of how MVC should work.

womp 2010-03-29 20:43:55

Womp,If I agree with you, then you are telling me to accommodate all the view's controller logic in a single controller file? How do I say that my controller is creating a view? Actually a single controller is creating multiple views(related logically but physically separate, I may not be a single time, but i contain the code to control multiple views). I could not understand how it violates the MVC framework concept? A lot of applications before MVC is released has been developed with one to one Controller and view map pattern. Can you explain me how justify the MVC pattern here ?

Jit 2010-03-29 20:53:33

Perhaps I misunderstood your intent - it sounded like you wanted to have a request to a view file (One.aspx) be routed to a controller, OneController.cs. MVC should have controllers that are loosely based on your entities, which would have multiple views. While there's nothing wrong with a one-to-one mapping as long as the controller is dictating the view, having the view dictate the controller is backwards.

womp 2010-03-29 21:43:00

I think we are in same line now. But how to achieve it in MVC1.0 ? To have this type of feature, I have to Create view structure like \View\One\One.aspx and Controller as \Controller\OneController.cs. This is ok. But I like to achieve the above feature by placing my controller as \Controller\Sales\OneController.cs and view as \View\Sales\One.aspx. It will give a clear cut folder structure. For it I think we need to change some configuration things. Any idea?

Jit 2010-03-29 23:00:22

ansaurus

tags:

views:

answers:

ASP.Net MVC View and Controller file structure

related questions