|
|
|
|
|
by Jonovono
924 days ago
|
|
That's fair. In my experience, once the endpoints get above a handful id rather not have to keep that all in working memory. And say you have several clients: android, ios, web, internal tooling, cli, rebase, etc. You make a change to 1 endpoint, now you have to remember everywhere you consume that client? Even 5 endpoints, 5 clients things are getting complex to keep in your head. I'd much rather if I make a change to an endpoint, my project literally won't build and my IDE yells at me. I can make sweeping changes and go to sleep knowing I didn't mess anything up. And I know if I bring another engineer on, they can make sweeping (or tiny) changes and not have to know all of the places that consume that. I should also note that WG doesn't require graphql. I have a few graphql operations, but you could use it completely without any graphql operations. |
|
I think you're making an allusion to GQL typing here, which I grant. A big downside of REST+JSON is that you've pushed most of the "interface contract" to the structure of the JSON file.
> I should also note that WG doesn't require graphql.
Sure. The common element to both (for me) is the layering of abstractions that hide what's really going on.