Not to take a single thing away from Trygve (he's a hell of a guy,
colleague and computer scientist), but his main contribution was a driving
will towards multiple views of models and a first implementation of the
idea in an early version of Smalltalk-76. The separation of views from
models was already a fixture of "Utah Graphics" in the late sixties, and it
was the attempt to generalize this that led to MVC. (P.S. we didn't do a
very good job of it ...).

Cheers,

Alan

-----

At 3:27 PM -0800 8/16/99, Alan Lovejoy wrote:
>> ** Original Sender: Dean_Swan at Mitel.COM
>> From:  Dean Swan at MITEL on 08/16/99 05:47 PM
>>
>> I personally think Morphic is MVC in fancy clothes.  Am I missing
>>something very
>> basic here, or have I just pointed out the nature of the Emperor's new
>>clothes?
>
>Ah, yes.
>
>I find it both very common, and very irritating, that people wrongfully label
>the Blue Book GUI architecture as "MVC," as though the two were synonyms.
>They are not.  See, for example, Trygve Reenskaug's book, "Working With
>Objects." (Mr. Reenskaug invented MVC architecture while on sabbatical
>at Xerox PARC in the late seventies).
>
>The Blue Book GUI is **an implementation** of an MVC-style architecture.
>Any GUI that defines separate roles for a "view," a "controller," and a
>"model"
>is an MVC architecture.  Note that one object can play two or more roles,
>as long as it is architecturally possible to allocate the three roles to
>different objects when desired (see, for example, modern VisualWorks).
>
>I would also contend that separating the model from the view is what really
>matters about MVC.
>
>--Alan