Question

I’ve recently been handed a code base which does a few things I’m a little different to how I usually do them.

The main difference is that it seems to pass elements (say for example a drop down list control) down to the business logic layer (in this case a separate project but still in the same solution) where the binding to business data takes place.

My natural approach is always to surface the information that is required up to the UI and bind there.

I’m struggling to match the first technique to any of the standard patterns but that may be down to the actual implementation less than the idea of what it is doing.

Has anyone ever encountered this type of architecture before? If so can you explain the advantages?

The solution is an ASP.Net website. Thanks.

Thanks,

Answer 1

I would make the case that this is a bad architecture, since the original developer tightly coupled the business logic to the presentation layer. If you wanted to switch from webforms to, say, MVC, you’d have to refactor chunks of your business layer, which shouldn’t be the case!

If it’s at all possible, you should consider moving away from developing the site in this fashion. In the interim, you can at least start the decoupling process by splitting the logic up a little bit further. If, say, you have a BindDropDown(DropDownList ddl) method, split the method apart, so you have a GetDropDownData() method that returns your actual business object, and BindDropDown only sets the values of the DropDownList. That way, at least, you’ll be more easily able to move away from the tight coupling of the presentation layer and business layer in the future.

Of course, if the site is already designed like that (with a clear demarcation between the presentation layer, the intermediate “presentation binding” layer, and the business layer), I could see a case being made that it’s acceptable. It doesn’t sound like that’s the case, however.