[eluser]Randy Casburn[/eluser]
[quote author="wiredesignz" date="1220659671"]This is exactly the type of discussion we need...[/quote]
You're right! Because not everyone codes in your preferred HMVC way of thinking.
[quote author="wiredesignz" date="1220659671"]...using plain CI allows people to ignore the MVC design patten (load anything from anywhere).[/quote]
Because sometimes that is exactly what we need! In a client/server environment the the server isn't always the master of the UI. Too many PHP coders are dillusional about that and think their favorite framework must support that at all costs.
I like CI primarily because it stays out of my way in this regard (pretty much) specifically. I'll load what I want, when I want, where I want, & how I want. I do so following well established design patterns. The problem seems to be the conceptual though that anything other than a singular "design pattern" that doesn't start with "M" have a "V" in the middle with a "C" on the end is evil or twisted or something.
Anyone who seriously uses ExtJS to build complete UIs with CI supporting in a server role understands my point here. When jQuery comes on board and the jQuery UI starts getting heavy use this post will have more than my rant behind it.
[quote author="wiredesignz" date="1220659671"]At least using well designed modules (mostly) prevents you from doing this it also makes you stop and think about application design in MVC terms and forces you into OOP thinking too. (module = MVC triad = container).[/quote]
And as I said above...if what Dave says is true, that HMVC or the implementation of it really stays completely out of the way, and I don't have to re-wicker all my sth to make it work...then I could care less.
But there is a reason the OP started this thread. It's because he has a heartache with the current direction of his favorite fork of CI that already did exactly what he's asking the core CI team to do to the core of CI.
What irony...just sayin'
Randy