Simplify code gen lib interface #2169
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Motivation: When reviewing APIs I noticed a few inconsistencies and some abstractions which are more complicated than they need to be. We should simplify this before we commit to a stable API. Modifications: - Replace the 'Name' type with a more concrete 'ServiceName' and 'MethodName'. They carry approximately equivalent information but the information is expressed in terms of what the names are used for (i.e. a function vs. what the expected format of the name is, e.g. lowercase). This makes it easier for users to understand how the names will be used and leaves room for more customisation in the future. - The service descriptor used two names: a namespace name and a service name. These have now been compressed into a single object (not all namespace name values were used). The namespace name was never used in isolation so this was adding unnecessary complexity. - The top-level 'SourceGenerator' type has been renamed 'CodeGenerator'. This is consistent with being a 'CodeGen' module and having a 'CodeGenerationRequest'. - The closures for returning code snippets to create a serializer/deserializer were renamed to make their user clearer. - Accidental public API was removed. Result: Slightly smaller and more consistent API.
gjcairo
approved these changes
Jan 22, 2025
Comment on lines
299
to
306
| let identifier = namespace.base.isEmpty ? name.base : namespace.base + "." + name.base | ||
|
|
||
| let upper = | ||
| namespace.generatedUpperCase.isEmpty | ||
| ? name.generatedUpperCase | ||
| : namespace.generatedUpperCase + "_" + name.generatedUpperCase | ||
|
|
||
| let lower = |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit, but can we rename these variable names to identifyingName, typeName and propertyName?
Before looking at the tests, I was very confused about the names and what each was supposed to be 😅 (e.g. it's called lower but we use name.generatedUpperCase, etc).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh yes, of course. I'm not sure why I used upper and lower here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
btw, WDYT of identifyingName? I'm not 100% happy with it but wasn't sure about alternatives.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Motivation:
When reviewing APIs I noticed a few inconsistencies and some abstractions which are more complicated than they need to be. We should simplify this before we commit to a stable API.
Modifications:
Result:
Slightly smaller and more consistent API.