MVVM is all the rave, is there still room for MVC or MVP in app development?

If you look into any recent app development tutorial, a lot of the examples are using the MVVM architecture, and for good reasons. But before we delve deeper, let's revisit the fundamental concepts of MVVM, MVC, and MVP.

‍

MVVM (Model-View-ViewModel):

1. Structure: MVVM divides an application into three main components: Model, View, and ViewModel.
2. Responsibilities:some text
   1. Model: Represents the application's data and business logic.
   2. View: Represents the UI components and layout, responsible for displaying data and capturing user input.
   3. ViewModel: Acts as an intermediary between the Model and the View. It exposes data and commands to the View via data binding and handles user interactions. The ViewModel typically implements application logic, manages state, and prepares data for display.
3. Usage:some text
   1. Widely used in modern client-side frameworks like WPF (Windows Presentation Foundation), Xamarin, AngularJS, and Vue.js.
   2. Promotes a clear separation of concerns, facilitates data binding, and enhances testability by decoupling the UI from the underlying business logic.
4. Pros:some text
   1. Separation of Concerns: MVVM promotes a clear separation of concerns between the UI (View) and the business logic (ViewModel), which enhances maintainability and testability.
   2. Declarative UI: Data binding facilitates a declarative approach to UI programming, where the View automatically updates in response to changes in the ViewModel, reducing the need for manual UI updates.
   3. Testability: The ViewModel can be unit tested independently of the View, making it easier to write automated tests for business logic and presentation logic.
   4. Scalability: MVVM scales well for complex UIs and large codebases, as it provides a structured approach to managing UI components and application state.
5. Cons:some text
   1. Learning Curve: Adopting MVVM requires understanding concepts such as data binding and ViewModel lifecycle, which may have a steep learning curve for developers new to the pattern.
   2. Boilerplate Code: MVVM implementations often involve boilerplate code for managing ViewModel instances, data binding, and event handling, which can increase code verbosity.
   3. Framework Dependencies: MVVM is closely tied to specific frameworks and platforms that support data binding (e.g., WPF, Xamarin), limiting its applicability outside of these ecosystems.
   4. Complexity: MVVM architectures can become overly complex when dealing with complex UI interactions, leading to increased cognitive load and potential performance overhead.

‍

MVC (Model-View-Controller):

1. Structure: MVC separates an application into three components: Model, View, and Controller.
2. Responsibilities:some text
   1. Model: Represents the application's data and business logic.
   2. View: Represents the UI components and layout, responsible for displaying data and capturing user input.
   3. Controller: Acts as an intermediary between the Model and the View. It handles user input, updates the Model, and updates the View accordingly.
3. Usage:some text
   1. Widely used in web development frameworks like Ruby on Rails, ASP.NET MVC, and Laravel.
   2. Promotes separation of concerns by dividing an application into distinct layers, but can lead to tight coupling between the View and the Controller.
4. Pros:some text
   1. Separation of Concerns: MVC separates an application into distinct layers, promoting a clear separation of concerns between the Model, View, and Controller.
   2. Modularity: MVC facilitates modularity and reusability by dividing an application into modular components that can be developed, tested, and maintained independently.
   3. Widely Adopted: MVC is a well-established architectural pattern with widespread adoption in web development frameworks, making it familiar to many developers.
   4. Flexibility: MVC provides flexibility in choosing libraries, frameworks, and tools for implementing each component, allowing developers to tailor solutions to specific project requirements.
5. Cons:some text
   1. Tight Coupling: MVC can lead to tight coupling between the View and the Controller, especially in web development where server-side rendering is common, making it challenging to maintain and test.
   2. Complexity: In complex applications, MVC architectures can become overly complex and difficult to manage due to the proliferation of controllers and the potential for spaghetti code.
   3. Code Duplication: MVC may result in code duplication, especially in scenarios where similar logic is implemented across multiple controllers or views, leading to maintenance overhead.
   4. Limited Support for Asynchronous UIs: MVC architectures may struggle to handle asynchronous UI updates and complex UI interactions without introducing additional complexity or breaking the separation of concerns.

‍

MVP (Model-View-Presenter):

1. Structure: MVP separates an application into three components: Model, View, and Presenter.
2. Responsibilities:some text
   1. Model: Represents the application's data and business logic.
   2. View: Represents the UI components and layout, responsible for displaying data and capturing user input. The View delegates user actions to the Presenter.
   3. Presenter: Acts as an intermediary between the Model and the View. It handles user input, updates the Model, and updates the View. The Presenter contains the application logic, while the View remains passive.
3. Usage:some text
   1. Commonly used in desktop and web applications where testability and separation of concerns are important.
   2. Facilitates unit testing by decoupling the View from the application logic, but can lead to increased complexity compared to MVC.
4. Pros:some text
   1. Testability: MVP promotes testability by decoupling the View from the application logic (Presenter), allowing for easier unit testing of business logic and presentation logic.
   2. Separation of Concerns: MVP provides a clear separation of concerns between the View, Presenter, and Model, enhancing maintainability and facilitating modular development.
   3. Controlled Interaction: The Presenter controls the interaction between the View and the Model, facilitating a clear flow of data and events and reducing the risk of UI-related bugs.
   4. Flexibility: MVP allows for flexibility in UI implementation, as the Presenter can be adapted to different UI technologies or frameworks without impacting the underlying business logic.
5. Cons:some text
   1. Boilerplate Code: MVP implementations often involve boilerplate code for managing communication between the View, Presenter, and Model, potentially increasing code verbosity and complexity.
   2. Increased Complexity: MVP architectures can introduce additional complexity, especially in scenarios where multiple Presenters interact with shared Model components or when managing complex UI interactions.
   3. Learning Curve: Adopting MVP requires understanding the responsibilities and interactions of the View, Presenter, and Model components, which may have a learning curve for developers new to the pattern.
   4. Potential for Massive Presenters: In applications with complex UI logic, Presenters may become overly large and complex, leading to maintainability issues and decreased readability.

‍

Simply by examining the advantages and disadvantages of each architecture, it's evident that both MVC and MVP patterns still hold considerable value. Not every project needs to go full blown MVVM. My personal preference is to use MVC for a smaller scope project, or if it’s a prototype project that I need to get out quickly. However, for bigger scope projects, MVVM is easily the right choice.