+1 on callbacks consistency and ensuring we version correctly for incompatible changes.
Scott P.S. I also have some monkey patches that I’ve been using over the SDK I need to submit as patches. On Mar 21, 2014, at 6:56 AM, Rod Simpson <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 on the validation. We did the dupe check initially because the API > returned a null-pointer error when posting a dupe instead of giving you back > a message telling you the entity already exists. > > +1 on consistent callbacks. Much needed and would make the development > experience more predictable. > > We should consider incrementing the major version number since this would > break backwards compatibility. > > > > -- > Rod Simpson > @rockerston > rodsimpson.com > > On March 21, 2014 at 7:42:26 AM, Ryan Bridges ([email protected]) wrote: > > Folks, > > I want to clean up the JS SDK to make it a bit more consistent. Among the > top-level objects (Entity, Collection, Group, etc), There are 2 big > inconsistencies: The validations performed before CRUD operations and the > data supplied in the callbacks from those operations. I would prefer if > the SDK performed no extra validation -- such as attempting to retrieve an > entity before updating it -- and instead performed the requested operation > and passed the error message back to be handled by the application. As for > the callbacks, some pass the response, some pass the deserialized JSON > object, and some pass the SDK object. If all callbacks were of the > form *function(err, > response, self)*, the programming model would be much easier to follow and > repeat. > > Does anyone have any comments or objections? > > -ryan > >
