I’m back? And WINDOZE still sucks!

Hello,

Am I back? Maybe. I won’t be updating, regularly, for sure. What I need (we) is more actions and results and less bullshyte. What this means: I won’t update, unless I have something really kick-ass; so, after getting this — kick-ass — thing out, I will then update and write about development, like I used to. Until then, adios..

…

There is the thing about my new computer: I’ve bought an AMD Phenom II X4 system, with ATI (the X2 one) hardware (GASPPPPPP!!!) ATI???

Yes. Even though I think ATI has shitty Linux drivers, but my friends and I decided that we are doing this “coalition of the willing thing,” — as far as computer ‘nerd’ shyt is concerned — where we are supporting the underdog (to further competetion for nerd shyte) — where we’re going gangsta on Intel and Nvidia and showing love to AMD and ATI! (No, my friend didn’t put it like that. I’ve taken liberties to sprinkle the “coaliation of the willing” thing. Cos I’m gangsta like that.)

HAHA. Initially I was not too sure about this choice, since I wanted the best hardware possible (one has to admit that the current Intel Nvidia X2 line kicks ass, performance-wise). But, after evaulating the price/performance ratio, I think AMD Phenom is a great choice. I’m still not complete 100% on the ATI decision, since I’ve been an Nvidia dude forever. But since this is gangsta… we got do gangsta stuff… so ATI it is. (I.E. we’re repping the AMD/ATI clique now)

And lastly… Windows (Vista) STILL SUCKS BALLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Haha, but I’m downloading Visual C++ express edition as we speak; parse what you will whatever meaning and implications from that

(So much hate… oh the humanity)

Random hate-box: MVC part too (Opps?)

Arghh. Let me just be very clear here, since it seems I may have misconceptions and misunderstanding about MVC. MVC can be defined as either an architectural pattern or a design pattern. What does this mean? I think the definition of this is dependent on scale. Again, I must say this blog is my personal blog. I have not spent time thinking about this (perhaps I should.) It is merely a place to put my thoughts. If I really want to get hardcore about it I would spend a couple of weeks, thinking really deep and hard, all the while writing and revising an essay around the subject. But I’m not inclined to spend this much time on it. I have books to read and other things to do. My hope is that as I gain more experience, i.e. doing AND learning, everything will become more clear.

My opinion is that MVC is a design pattern, and design pattern is a conceptual solution to some common programming design problem with which we can use to think about the design (and of course eventual implementation) of a module, or an entire software.

I will go over a general over-view of MVC, and specific examples of my understanding of this as is implemented in Project Zombie.

What is MVC?

MVC: A design pattern which separates the concerns for the domain specific model (or computational operation of data), rendering of the model for specific presentations, and a event processing controller.

This is the definition. From here this thing can go many ways, that is, it may have many different actualizing implementations. (Can I even say this. I think I can. Certainlly you can have different ways of demarcating the MVC concerns.)

So following the above, I also should ask: should we really pigeonhole ourselves to this strict definition of MVC? Or can we have some freedom when implementing the conceptual design pattern. So if I understand design pattern correctly as a conceptual solution, then I believe we do have wiggle room to “wiggle” ourselves into various realizations of the solution.

Project Zombie:

I’m going to go on describing how I choose to implement MVC in Project Zombie. Note, after looking at the code, and having finished reading Effective C++, I would have done some things differently. That is, in the future when designing I would take into account some of the advices given in that book. (This outa be something I should blog about in the future.)

Domain model as the State:

One of domain model is the game state. The game state encapsulates various things relating to operations of the state. Note, the game state can contain MVC pattern like realizations in themselves, recursively.

Arghh blah. I’m get tired of writing this.

I’m off to read Effective Java.

Random hate-box: MVC Web Frameworks debate (blurb)

First of all, I like to say all this below is just my uninformed opinions. The whole point of this blog is so I can mimic GTA4’s www.blogsnobs.com (what?).

Anyway, awhile ago I did a series of blurbs (retarded blurbs you may say) on my seat-of-the-pants experience with Django. To be honest, it was merely a dipping of the toe into the shark-infested water of Django; imho one should take what I had to say with a heavy dose of salt, for it was just my two week impression, that’s it, don’t read too deep into it. So I did say something along the line of template implies view, model implies model and other blahs. Well, it wasn’t precisely correct. I tend to do a lot of hand waving and blurbs. It was just me sitting here and putting my stream of thoughts out on this page, without reallying getting into too much of a detailed thought.

To me MVC is merely a pattern, useful for implementation of “separation of concern.” One can argue this and that, but to me, Django does have this sort of separation of concern. Sure, it may not be exactly like a desktop GUI application’s MVC, but the point is that it has this sort of MVC equivalent separation of concern generalization (Does it use encapsulation and abstraction to separate out different functions pertaining to view, controller, and data computation? Yes? Well, you know the saying: talks like a duck, smells like a duck, then it must a singularity!) When I say template == view, I really mean template + a servelet like thing on the server side. The “servelet thing” can handle request and response (and by operating with respect to the ‘model’ in Django). So Django is not neccessary MVC per-se, but it fits this MVC like separation of concern generalization.

The reason I said what I said is because I’ve just finished working with SEAM, which has this MVC-like seperation concern of thing going. With the “View” consisting of both the crap on the JSF side and EJB3 side. But please DO NOT QUOTE me on this. This is just a personal blog. I don’t have much experience with Web Development.

Also this entire web app. thing can also be argued to fit into this MVC pattern. With the web client the “view” and with the business logic / data (Model) residing on the server. Can one argue that the entire Client-Server architecture fits in with this MVC pattern also? IMHO one can make an argument for it.