Optional Paramaters

[rscole]

I have created a method on an ApiController with optional parameters:

Public void getInformation(int? id1 = null, int? id2 = null){
}

When generating the proxy code, the method in WebApiProxy.generated.cs is:

Void getInformation(Nullable<Int32> id1, Nullable<int32>id2);

I would like to call this method with any of the following:

getInformation(1,2);
getInformation(1);
getInformation();

Currently I have to call this method with nulls for it to work:

getInformation(1,null);
getInformation(null,null);

Is there something I can do or can be changed so I can call this method without passing it null values?

[swethapavan]

How about creating overloaded methods in the controller and these overloaded methods in turn call a single private method having the optional parameters.

[Korporal]

@swethapavan @faniereynders @rscole - This strikes me as a an obvious no-brainer, the proxy signature is clearly wrong and there should be no need for the client to do any hacking/fiddling with overloads. This issue also seems to be rather old so I wonder - why should we consider using WebApiProxy if issues like these are being simply ignored?

I'm considering using this (or something like it) but all too often these open source projects become a burden because users end up self-maintaining their fork versions because the base repo simply falls behind.

I'd expect an issue like this to be treated more quickly and I suspect (without looking at the code) that it isn't a huge change - so why has it been ignored for 9 months?

[faniereynders]

Thank you for your feedback! Open source projects are hard if there are limited time or resources able to contribute to any issues. As much as I would like us to deliver some or all of the outstanding work, the fact is that life happens. Issues don’t get resolved as fast as we liked to and we are very dependent on external pull requests to get this done. If possible, please fork, fix and send PR to any issues calling for your immediate attention. If you’d like to connect please reach out! Sorry again for any inconvenience friends. Get Outlook for iOS On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 8:45 PM +0200, "Hugh Gleaves" <[email protected]> wrote: @swethapavan @faniereynders @rscole - This strikes me as a an obvious no-brainer, the proxy signature is clearly wrong and there should be no need for the client to do any hacking/fiddling with overloads. This issue also seems to be rather old so I wonder - why should we consider using WebApiProxy if issues like these are being simply ignored? I'm considering using this (or something like it) but all too often these open source projects become a burden because users end up self-maintaining their fork versions because the base repo simply falls behind. I'd expect an issue like this to be treated more quickly and I suspect (without looking at the code) that it isn't a huge change - so why has it been ignored for 9 months? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[Korporal]

@faniereynders - I'd consider forking etc but then I see old PRs like this:

#117

Which seem like a basic and simple improvement but there's no comment from you, this give me the feeling that if I did get involved and go to the trouble of creating some pull requests, they'd sit there for months, apparently ignored by you.

[faniereynders]

Understandable, but please bear in mind that the focus of this project is to solve something beyond the normal proxy generation but more a cross platform REST technology acnostic solution instead. The initial focus was getting  the c# client good to go but there are still issues making it challenging.  At the moment it is just me attending to the current issues when I get eventual time. Get Outlook for iOS On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 8:58 PM +0200, "Hugh Gleaves" <[email protected]> wrote: @faniereynders - I'd consider forking etc but then I see old PRs like this: #117 Which seem like a basic and simple improvement but there's no comment from you, this give me the feeling that if I did get involved and go to the trouble of creating some pull requests, they'd site there for months, apparently ignored by you. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.