Hi,
I was wondering why "fluent API" or "fluent interface" brings so many developer into trouble. I do like that kind of style, but I am not sure I would sacrifice my whole development style for this nice calling structure.
As a C# developer I found a way to go for me. I wrote an extension method on object-level like this:
now i can work fluent like this:
great.
It is probably not that expressive as it is in a real fluent interface, but it works for every single object in every single case...
Nevertheless see Martin Fowler's original post on FluentInterfaces: https://www.martinfowler.com/bliki/FluentInterface.html
kr,
Daniel
I was wondering why "fluent API" or "fluent interface" brings so many developer into trouble. I do like that kind of style, but I am not sure I would sacrifice my whole development style for this nice calling structure.
As a C# developer I found a way to go for me. I wrote an extension method on object-level like this:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 | static class Fluent { public static T Do<T>(this T item, Action<T> method) { method(item); return item; } } |
now i can work fluent like this:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 | class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { Console.Out .Do(x => x.WriteLine("test1")) .Do(x => x.WriteLine("test2")) .Do(x => x.WriteLine("test3")) .Do(x => x.WriteLine("test4")) .Do(x => x.WriteLine("test5")) .Do(x => x.WriteLine("test6")); } } |
great.
It is probably not that expressive as it is in a real fluent interface, but it works for every single object in every single case...
Nevertheless see Martin Fowler's original post on FluentInterfaces: https://www.martinfowler.com/bliki/FluentInterface.html
kr,
Daniel
No comments:
Post a Comment