MVP Design Patterns – Communication Between Multiple Presenters in MVP

In order to make it easier for the presenter at the lowest level to interact with the views of other presenters, I just added a method to the interface of the various presenters to return the view they are controlling. This way I can hook my presenter at the lowest level into the events of those views.

If anyone can point out any problems this will cause down the line, I am all ears. Thanks!

The real key is to separate logic from effects. IMO, this is the primary goal of any architectural pattern. Both MVP and MVVM (if done right) do a decent job of enforcing this separation.

As long as you have a system to enforce this separation that is consistently used, then your architecture is good as far as I'm concerned.

Once that primary goal is met, the next question is, how easy is it to be consistent? When comparing two architectures that are both successfully keeping logic and effects separate, the better architecture is the one that requires the least boilerplate.

By "boilerplate" I am explicitly calling out the requirement of creating test doubles in unit tests. If you need to create a test double in order to unit test your logic, it means you have injected effects into your logic, that now must be mocked out in order to test said logic. Ideally, that won't be necessary and the architecture that requires fewer test doubles when unit testing logic is better by this view.

Now there are lot of variations of both the MVP and MVVM pattern and you haven't specified exactly how you have or plan to implement the two architectures, so I won't call out either as being better or worse. But if I were looking at your code, the above two criteria would be what I use to "tip the balance."

Can I (1) test the logic in the system without tripping effects and (2) do so without creating a bunch of test doubles (mocks, fakes and stubs) in the process?