Is it possible to adopt MVVM design pattern in one platform such as windows phone and implement the code the way that is portable to other platforms like android and iOS regarding data binding?
Or I’d better ask if MVVM design pattern is common between different platforms?
It is based on the Model-View-Controller pattern, which is applicable to all platforms. MVVM is a variation based on the various DataBinding features in WPF. At least that's the context where the term MVVM is most commonly used.
While the pattern itself is portable, you won't be able to use your Windows Phone code for platforms like Android or iOS.
While the pattern might be applicable in different plattforms the implementation won't be (for example iOS's Objective-C / device-specific APIs vs. Windows Phones C# / Silverlight).
Only solution might be going HTML5/CSS/JavaScript - I think you might be able to use MVVM there but it's more a technology than an pattern thing.
There is an implementation of MVVM pattern using JavaScript and HTML (thus making it very portable):
http://knockoutjs.com
Since there are at least two very different platforms and libraries that allow you to easily use this pattern, the answer is YES.
Related
I've decided to dabble a bit in MonoDroid and MonoTouch and port one of my WP7 apps as a starter. I would really like to reuse my existing ViewModels but since both Android and iOS seem to have no such thing as XAML's strong databinding I would like to ask if anyone went that route before and can recommend some best practices or existing solutions.
We're doing this with an application right now, but writing for iOS first (even before Windows). It is not full of rainbows and ponies for sure.
I would recommend the following:
Use a MVVM framework on Windows that doesn't require you to expose ICommand on every action the user takes (like Caliburn, for example), it also shouldn't require a dependency to it from within all of your ViewModels.
Conditionally inherit the WPF-specific pieces of your ViewModelBase class, you can do this with partial classes or an #if iPhone directive. INotifyPropertyChanged or ICommand are examples.
Use an IoC container, it is very helpful to abstract out things like saving settings to the filesystem which will be very different on all platforms. Also helps to sort out your dependencies as well, which is very helpful for separating out platform-specific code from non-platform specific.
Use a "messenger" of some kind (example here), usually included with an MVVM framework. This is a must in my opinion, at least for iOS. Apple's MVC is so all over the place, it's better to have global messages you can subscribe to in a weak referenced (and decoupled) way.
Use MVC on each platform like you would natively, then treat each ViewModel as you would if you were calling it manually. There are no UI bindings, no ICommand, so keep your ViewModel's simple.
Linking files is the best trick ever. You don't want a copy of each view model per platform, so make sure you know how to link to a file within projects in Visual Studio and MonoDevelop. This also makes #if iPhone and #if Android statements possible.
I know you are working with an existing application, so it's tough. It may be simpler to just reuse your business model and that's it. Android and iOS have MVC patterns of their own, and are drastically different from WPF. You might also only need a subset of each ViewModel on mobile devices, which could make it easier to just rewrite.
In our case:
We're using TinyIoC (also has it's own messenger)
We will use Caliburn-Micro when we start on WPF, we don't need some of the features in full Caliburn
I've recently finished a large project which we wrote wp7 first, and which was then ported into touch and droid.
As part of this we've released our own mvvm framework - including some databinding support for touch and droid - the source is available at http://github.com/slodge/mvvmcross
The experience of porting to droid was good - the axml layout files provided a good hook for databinding. Currently, however, i'm not quite as happy with the binding we achieved for touch - although montouch.dialog does at least provide us with some nice looking code sometimes.
I was trying to find an answer for my question today using google and StackOverflow search engines... but no luck :)
I was wondering what are the key features of every framework for end user, and how can you characterize every framework from the end-user point of view (I've looked into Framework Design Guidelines by K. Cwalina, but I've found only concepts and guidelines for framework architects), for me:
it should be extensible
should let build extensible and reusable components
and of course : Simple things should be simple, complex things should be possible. (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Alan_Kay)
I think there is much more out there.
Please share your knowledge.
Here are two good quotes from Ralph Johnson and Brian Foote
A framework is a reusable, ``semi-complete'' application that can be specialized to produce custom applications
One important characteristic of a framework is that the methods defined by the user to tailor the framework will often be called from within the framework itself, rather than from the user's application code. The framework often plays the role of the main program in coordinating and sequencing application activity. This inversion of control gives frameworks the power to serve as extensible skeletons. The methods supplied by the user tailor the generic algorithms defined in the framework for a particular application.
There was a special issue of CACM that you might want to take a look at too.
Here's one more link The Hollywood Principal. "Don't call us, we'll call you." About how the framework inverts the typical control so the framework calls your code instead of you calling some library code.
It sounds like you just want to know what is the defining characteristic of a framework...?
From FOLDOC:
In object-oriented systems, a set of classes that embodies an abstract design for solutions to a number of related problems.
So basically, a class library ("set of classes") that's extensible ("embodies an abstract design"),
I'll attempt a definition based on my own understanding: A framework is a body of code that abstracts a subset of tasks common to some classes of application programs. The intent is to provide, once, proven and tested code so that application programming doesn't have to keep re-inventing code for the common tasks handled by the framework.
In real life, frameworks often spring into being when a programmer or team get carried away with generalizing and future-proofing what started out as a single application. There's an honorable intent to start code re-use, but it often turns out that such frameworks aren't designed with intent from the beginning, don't have consistent design reflecting this intent, and are actually lousy code that ends up not being re-used at all. Most architects who feel qualified to create frameworks, aren't.
The difference between libraries and frameworks: You call libraries. Frameworks call you.
Answering your question covering the depth it deserves is beyond the scope of this forum. All you should do is read this book though its focused on .Net frmaework specifically and written by the designers of the .Net framework, I'm sure the wisdom and information that this book provides would be sufficient to answer your question and satisfy your curiosities on the subject.
Framework Design Guidelines: Conventions, Idioms, and Patterns for Reusable .NET Libraries (2nd Edition)
alt text http://www.lybrary.com/images/0321605012.jpg
A Framework is for me a other name for a Library (like Boost and many others) that is not about only one Topic (there are Librarys about Math, Networking, whatever out there, but these are no Frameworks) and it is of course Extensible and you can combine the Features of it to do your Job.
What are the advantages of using Framework over Library or other way around while developing Web Applications or different types of Software.
I understand using Framework we can make use of basic functionality and then add upon functionality which we require but I am having hard time understanding the advantages of it as if we develop using Library than also we get some basic functionality and then add upon them the functionality as we need and so where in comes the actual advantages of using Framework.
I think it's important to distinguish between a framework and a library when answering.
A framework follows the Hollywood principle: "Don't call us; we'll call you." You plug your code into the framework according to its API. The framework acts as a constraint that solves the particular problem it was designed to solve (e.g., web application development).
A framework will use a combination of your code and 3rd party libraries to solve a particular problem. It will treat your code as one of those 3rd party libraries.
If you eschew a framework, the roles are reversed. Now you and your code are in charge: "I'll do the calling, thank you." A library is a self-contained piece that plugs into the software that you write.
So why prefer a framework? Use one that is written better than the scaffolding that you would be able to write yourself. A framework is likely to be tested more thoroughly and have a wider user base than code you'll write.
You'd write an application without a framework if you're working on a specialized problem, you have deep knowledge of the domain, and there are no frameworks available that demonstrate deeper insight than you have.
A library is just something that solves a problem but it is your job to integrate it the project. Basically it offers some feature that are context-free.
A framework will provide the features plus an infrastructure for them - you will have to develop according to the framework's rules. So you might have less control and freedom but you save time.
I'm in some sort of confusion: at one hand Microsoft architects and surrounding web community promote MVVM pattern for building WPF apps, but from the other hand in Prism patterns and practices they uses absolutely other design patterns - MVP, Presentation Model and Supervising Controller! And not a single example of use pure MVVM! They even say nothing about using MVVM in their PRISM documentation! So, what should one do in this situation? Is it possible to use MVVM pattern in PRISM applications with the same level of freedom as with patterns listed above? I mean would it be more complex or not because of (probably) kind a native architectural optimization for these patterns?
Absolutely. PRISM glues the parts of your composite application together, but those parts may use MVVM or whatever pattern you prefer (as can your Shell).
You can definitely use MVVM with Prism.
Blaine Wastell from the Patterns and Practices group has said that the next version of Prism (v4) will contain more help for the MVVM pattern. I've read somewhere else that this means better support for MVVM in Blend, and more MVVM in the documentation.
http://blogs.msdn.com/blaine/archive/2010/01/15/prism-4-0.aspx
I have a set of functionality (classes) that I would like to share with an application I'm building for the iPhone and for the Blackberry (Java). Does anyone have any best practices on doing this?
This is not going to be possible as far as I understand your question - the binary format for the iPhone and Java are not compatible - and even for a native library on a blackberry device.
This is not like building for OS X where you can use Java unfornately the iPhone doesn't support Java.
The best idea is probably to build you library in Objective-C and then port it to Java which is an easier transition than going the other way. If you programme for Objective-C and make sure you code has no memory leaks - then the changes are not so complex.
If you keep the structure of your classes the same then you should find maintenance much simpler - fix a bug in the Java and you should find it easy to check for the same bug in the ObjC methods etc.
Hope this helps - sorry that it is not all good news.
As Grouchal mentioned - you are not going to be able to share any physical components of your application between the two platforms. However you should be able to share the logical design of your application if you carefully separate it into highly decoupled layers. This is still a big win because the logical application design probably accounts for a large part of your development effort.
You could aim to wrap the sections of the platform specific APIs (iPhone SDK etc.) that you use with your own interfaces. In doing so you are effectively hiding the platform specific libraries and making your design and code easier to manage when dealing with differences in the platforms.
With this in place you can write your core application code so that it appears very similar on either platform - even though they are written in different languages. I find Java and Objective-C to be very similar conceptually (at least at the level at which I use it) and would expect to be able to achieve parity with at least the following:
An almost identical set of Java and Objective-C classes with the same names and responsibilities
Java/Objective-C classes with similarly named methods
Java/Objective-C methods with the same responsibilities and logical implementations
This alone will make the application easier to understand across platforms. Of course the code will always look very different at the edges - i.e when you start dealing with the view, threading, networking etc. However, these concerns will be handled by your API wrappers which once developed should have fairly static interfaces.
You might also stand to benefit if you later developer further applications that need to be delivered to both platforms as you might find that you can reuse or extend your API wrappers.
If you are writing a client-server type application you should also try and keep as much logic on your server as possible. Keep the amount of extra business logic on the device to a minimum. The more you can just treat the device as a view layer the less porting you'll have to do over all.
Aside from that, following the same naming conventions and package structure across all the projects helps greatly, especially for your framework code.
The UI API's and usability paradigms for BlackBerry and iPhone are so different that it won't be possible in most cases to directly port this kind of logic between apps. The biggest mistake one could make (in my opinion) is to try and transplant a user experience designed for one mobile platform on to another. The way people interact with BlackBerrys vs iPhones is very different so be prepared to revamp your user experience for each mobile platform you want to deploy on.
Hope this is helpful.
It is possible to write C++ code that works in both a BB10 Native app and an iOS app.
XCode would need to see the C++ files as ObjectiveCPP code.
I am currently working on such a task in my spare time. I have not yet completed it enough to either show or know if it is truly possible, but I haven't run in to any road-blocks yet.
You will need to be disciplined to write good cross-platform code designed w/ abstractions for platform-specific features.
My general pattern is that I have "class Foo" to do cross platform stuff, and a "class FooPlatform" to do platform specific stuff.
Class "Foo" can call class "FooPlatform" which abstracts out anything platform specific.
The raw cross-platform code is itself not compile-able on its own.
Separate BB10 and XCode projects are created in their respective IDEs.
Each project implements a thin (few [dozen] line) "class FooPlatform" and references the raw cross-platform code.
When I get something working that I can show I will post again here...