Timeline for How can I apply the MVC pattern to a C# WinForms application?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 29, 2020 at 6:34 | comment | added | onefootswill | I'm reading this very late in the piece, but I just wanted to correct the record here. WPF does not suck at all. It's easily the best presentation layer tech for desktop programming. WinForms is great, but WPF is a masterpiece. WPF is to Photoshop as WinForms is to Paint. If anything sucks, it is UWP. That REALLY sucks. | |
| Dec 17, 2019 at 7:23 | comment | added | Doc Brown | WinformsMVP has got a new home in between. | |
| Mar 30, 2019 at 4:36 | history | protected | gnat | ||
| Mar 8, 2019 at 12:52 | vote | accept | Sossenbinder | ||
| Jun 7, 2018 at 20:16 | comment | added | NoChance | Making things simple pays on the long run. | |
| Jun 7, 2018 at 13:58 | answer | added | Alluring Topaz | timeline score: 4 | |
| May 22, 2018 at 8:30 | comment | added | Flater | @RobertHarvey: If I want to hack together a small tool, I can slap something together in WinForms much faster than in WPF (having average experience in both). WPF gives you more control, but it takes a bit of managing when starting from scratch. That's not a professional argument (I agree that WPF > WinForms for enterprise solutions), but rather one that proves the simplicity of WinForms in cases where form doesn't matter all that much. | |
| Oct 20, 2017 at 22:22 | comment | added | Fabio | @RobertHarvey - Winforms have data-binding as well (not so powerful as WPF of course) and MVVM can be applied for Winforms too with same benefits of separation of concerns as in WPF. You can even re-use same viewmodels in WPF later ;) | |
| Jun 29, 2017 at 9:59 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackSoftEng/status/880365113852690432 | ||
| Jun 29, 2017 at 0:38 | comment | added | RubberDuck | Just a note about MVP (which is the right answer btw): MVP is a a flavor of MVC. So is MVVM and the form of MVC we see in most web frameworks. | |
| Jun 28, 2017 at 21:14 | comment | added | Robert Harvey | For in-house desktop programs, I'd say so. But many companies prefer browser-based applications for their business operations, simply because there is no installation required. | |
| Jun 28, 2017 at 21:04 | comment | added | Sossenbinder | So, you would say learning WPF is a good thing to do? Is it the go-to C# GUI tool in the industry as well? | |
| Jun 28, 2017 at 20:56 | comment | added | Peter M | @RobertHarvey Styles. Don't forget styles. And skinning controls. | |
| Jun 28, 2017 at 20:53 | comment | added | Peter M | @whatsisname WPF may suck, but it sucks a lot less than Winforms for anything over and above a toy program | |
| Jun 28, 2017 at 20:53 | comment | added | Robert Harvey | To paraphrase @whatsisname's comment, WPF is geared towards larger applications. Smaller applications might be better served with Winforms because Winforms is arguably simpler. However, if you want to make that argument, you could also make the argument that your Winforms application is small enough where it probably doesn't need MVP anyway. MVVM is baked into WPF. WPF has vector-based graphics, so it doesn't suffer the same sizing problems that Winforms does. WPF is very composable (you can easily put controls inside other controls), and it's got killer data binding. What's not to like? | |
| Jun 28, 2017 at 20:33 | comment | added | whatsisname | @PeterM: because even after 10 years WPF sucks and is still slow. | |
| Jun 28, 2017 at 20:02 | comment | added | Peter M | OT question. But why WInforms? WPF was meant to replace Winforms and supports MVC (Well technically MVVM). Although I will say that the WPF learning curve can be steep. (but if you do it badly you can make WPF code look like Winforms) | |
| Jun 28, 2017 at 19:36 | history | asked | Sossenbinder | CC BY-SA 3.0 |