I've been using both this SDK and the NodeJS SDK extensively for a few months now, and I've found that the SDKs are much easier to use when API calls are promise-based. I've been using a wrapper function that provides this functionality, which works fine but is not ideal. That looks something like this (shortened for brevity)
function playfabAPI(endpoint, requestObject) {
return new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
PlayFabClientSDK[endpoint](requestObject, function(error, result) {
if (error !== null) {
// Request error
return reject(new Error(error));
}
else if (result && result["code"] == 200) {
// Request successful
return resolve(result);
}
else {
// Non-200 HTTP status
return reject(new Error(result.status));
}
});
});
}This makes for cleaner code, adds useful functionality, and eliminates a lot of redundant error checking code. The current request functions are consistent enough for this to work in most cases so far but I'm a bit wary of using it in production. What I would propose is to implement this either alongside the current format, or as an additional SDK/script, for compatibility reasons.
Example of how this change could be implemented in a given function:
Current
exports.UpdateUserData = function (request, callback) {
if (PlayFab._internalSettings.sessionTicket == null) {
throw "Must be logged in to call this method";
}
PlayFab.MakeRequest(
PlayFab.GetServerUrl() + "/Client/UpdateUserData",
request,
"X-Authorization",
PlayFab._internalSettings.sessionTicket,
function (error, result) {
if (callback != null) {
callback(error, result);
}
},
);
};Proposed
exports.UpdateUserData = function (request)
{
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
if (PlayFab._internalSettings.sessionTicket == null) {
throw "Must be logged in to call this method";
}
PlayFab.MakeRequest(
PlayFab.GetServerUrl() + "/Client/UpdateUserData",
request,
"X-Authorization",
PlayFab._internalSettings.sessionTicket,
(error, result) => {
if (error !== null) {
return reject(new Error(error));
}
else if (result && result["code"] == 200) {
return resolve(result);
}
else {
return reject(new Error(result.status));
}
},
);
});
};
Example usage of current vs proposed usage:
Current
PlayFabClientSDK.UpdateUserData(requestParameters, function(error, result) {
// Check for + handle errors...
// Handle result...
});Proposed
PlayFabClientSDK.UpdateUserData(requestParameters).then((userDataResult) => {
// Handle userDataResult...
}).catch((error) => {
// Handle errors...
});This would also have the added benefit of allowing the use of async/await which can greatly simplify code structure, e.g. when chaining requests
(async function() {
const userDataResult = await PlayFabClientSDK.UpdateUserData(requestParameters);
// Handle userDataResult/make additional API requests
})();
Let me know what you guys think. Is this something that would be better served using the SDK generator with a custom config, or would it be feasible to get an official implementation?
I've been using both this SDK and the NodeJS SDK extensively for a few months now, and I've found that the SDKs are much easier to use when API calls are promise-based. I've been using a wrapper function that provides this functionality, which works fine but is not ideal. That looks something like this (shortened for brevity)
This makes for cleaner code, adds useful functionality, and eliminates a lot of redundant error checking code. The current request functions are consistent enough for this to work in most cases so far but I'm a bit wary of using it in production. What I would propose is to implement this either alongside the current format, or as an additional SDK/script, for compatibility reasons.
Example of how this change could be implemented in a given function:
Current
Proposed
Example usage of current vs proposed usage:
Current
Proposed
This would also have the added benefit of allowing the use of async/await which can greatly simplify code structure, e.g. when chaining requests
Let me know what you guys think. Is this something that would be better served using the SDK generator with a custom config, or would it be feasible to get an official implementation?