Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
In ASP.NET MVC, we’re required to use the suffix ‘Controller’ for all controllers. This seems unnecessarily restrictive – is there a technical reason for it?
I’m mostly just curious, but can see situations where more flexible naming rules could improve code organization. Couldn’t the discovery of possible controller classes be easily made using reflection to search for Controller derived classes? Or require that controller classes be marked with a ControllerAttribute?
The MVC community is heavily influenced by Ruby on Rails, which values ‘convention over configuration‘. By just naming things consistently, the application can run with zero configuration.