We keep them together because that is what is going to be sent to the server. We don't have such a strong split between methods and services; services are a lightweight way of grouping methods together.
Can you describe what you would like to use the simple method name for? On Tuesday, January 17, 2017 at 4:07:52 PM UTC-8, Noel Yap wrote: > > We have a need to get the simple method name from MethodDescriptor. For > example, the simple service name of service/method is method. This can be > implemented using extractFullServiceName but sometimes we want both the > full service name as well as the simple method name and implementing > extractSimpleMethodName in terms of extractFullServiceName would mean > searching for / at least twice through the full method name. This can be > avoided if MethodDescriptor stored the full service name and the simple > method name separately. Before I start working on a PR, I'd like to know if > this is a change the team would be open to and, if so, any other > information that might be helpful. > > Thanks, > Noel > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "grpc.io" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/grpc-io. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/grpc-io/8e574215-38a7-411f-aad6-47ade1095228%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
