Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

13
  • 33
    Let me try to explain. This solution isn't correct according to design paters. You modified the model according to view purpose. But model has to contain data only and doesn't care about presentations. You have to move this functionality on the other layer. Commented Apr 17, 2013 at 13:52
  • 5
    Actually, Model is used to pass data from controller, ant it is controller, who does not care about presentation. Introduction of automated property (GenderString here) does not break controller, which still uses Gender property, but provides easy access for a view. Logical solution. Commented Jul 16, 2013 at 9:12
  • 20
    @RredCat There is nothing wrong with having view-specific properties in the "view model". IMHO the mistake would be not to split the view model from the domain model: blogs.msdn.com/b/simonince/archive/2010/01/26/… Commented Aug 23, 2013 at 17:46
  • 6
    @RredCat, even if it were incorrect according to some pattern, the OP says nothing about this, so this is indeed a correct answer. (Even if I philosophically may agree with your point.) Commented Nov 4, 2013 at 9:11
  • 13
    The pedantically absurd bike-shedding in this comment thread is fascinating. Commented Jul 22, 2015 at 1:12