On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 5:30 AM Vahab Jabrayilov <[email protected]> wrote:
> Since, they don't have any setters associated with them I cannot use those > classes in my main logic; > "Can't" is a bit strong. You could use the immutable objects in your logic, but I'd agree that produces a very different code structure. Immutable objects can have nice benefits when multi-threading. hence I keep my version of custom implementation for main logic and use > gRPC generated one for communication; > That is a common approach, but for the different reason of allowing your application internals to be a bit different from the messages used for communication. For example, if you want to add a "processed" bit to a message as part of a (theoretical) optimization, then you'd have to expose that to your users with your current design. My question is "Is there any way to overcome having redundant classes ? How > can I use the gRPC generated ones in my implementation such that I will be > able to mutate them?" > You can use the builders as mutable objects, but only briefly. I think once you build a message (a copy) to use with gRPC it takes another copy to make its children mutable again. I think people just use the immutable objects or make their own classes. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/grpc-io/CA%2B4M1oPo6gRFYKpnJ1Ws5vjpp%2BOOxdLrK%3D0Vj%2BW9MTPoQTCwCw%40mail.gmail.com.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
