I think this is mostly my fault as I think I started the trend! I wanted to open a discussion around naming handlers as we start to think about documenting some of the allReady coding conventions.
Currently most handler classes which implement the IAsyncRequestHandler are named with the suffix Async e.g. EditCampaignCommandHandlerAsync
While async methods should be named in this way (based on some guidance I've seen) I'm not sure it makes much sense to explicitly name the handler class this way In my example EditCampaignCommandHandler would be sufficient.
I'm wondering what other contributors think about revising these going forward?
cc/ @mgmccarthy @MisterJames @dpaquette
I think this is mostly my fault as I think I started the trend! I wanted to open a discussion around naming handlers as we start to think about documenting some of the allReady coding conventions.
Currently most handler classes which implement the IAsyncRequestHandler are named with the suffix Async e.g. EditCampaignCommandHandlerAsync
While async methods should be named in this way (based on some guidance I've seen) I'm not sure it makes much sense to explicitly name the handler class this way In my example EditCampaignCommandHandler would be sufficient.
I'm wondering what other contributors think about revising these going forward?
cc/ @mgmccarthy @MisterJames @dpaquette