Csharp serverside abstractclass v2#5813
Closed
jtattermusch wants to merge 6 commits intogrpc:masterfrom
Closed
Conversation
Contributor
|
Yes, I've seen the Service suffix very commonly. I'm not sure that FooServiceGrpc is too bad though. |
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Same as #5751 but with extra changes to get the idea how the resulting code looks like:
One of the problems with the "Grpc" suffix seems to be that many people like to add suffix "Service" to their service names (which seems to be against protobuf code style, but still), in which case the resulting class name ("TestServiceGrpc") looks a bit weird.
@jskeet , @chrisdunelm