Simplify usage of Success.Of

[tjaskula]

The usage of Success.Of is cumbersome like Success.Of<StorageException, Result>(Result.Success)

The idea is to simplify type parameters:

• we don't need to pass in the type of the exception, by default it should have just the Exception property set if there was an issue.

It should be Success<T> or even better it should be Result<T> as "success" with a failure is more a result than a successful operation.

@VaughnVernon Any ideas?

[tjaskula]

The same can be said about Failure<TCause, TValue> which in that cas should be Failure<TCause>

[VaughnVernon]

You can put the ugly typing on the new inside the class method.

[tjaskula]

You can put the ugly typing on the new inside the class method.

I don't understand

[VaughnVernon]

From: Success.Of<StorageException, Result>(Result.Success) { ... }

To: Success.Of(Result result) { return new Success.InteralOf<StorageException, Result>(result); }

It's only the gist, not necessarily the way.

[tjaskula]

Ok, I understand better. However in .NET implementation StorageException type parameter is never used in Success except from carrying it from one end to another. If we dropped it it could be Type of Exception and would be good to go.

[VaughnVernon]

Sure, that's fine. Still I think there should be an internal method that hides those details. Requiring someone to type an unnecessary generic declaration is a pain.