ApiEndpoints VS fslang-suggestions

I personally prefer the API Endponts project that doesn’t get the love it deserves. It’s really the best of both worlds. It breaks each endpoint up into one file to make it easier to manage and prevents ginormous Controllers.

I personally think it feels "cleaner" when using the controllers instead because they provide more out of the box features. Having one endpoint per file is a nice thing so I'm thinking about using the ApiEndpoints ( https://github.com/ardalis/ApiEndpoints ) package.

You can follow a "controller per endpoint" strategy. One good way to do it is with Steve Smith ApiEndpoints: https://github.com/ardalis/ApiEndpoints

I'm not disputing the benefits of thin controllers but there are other ways to make the controllers thinner. For example, I could use libraries such as ApiEndpoints which allows me to have one handler class per REST endpoint. Basically, MediatR pattern but at the ASP.net level.

The only think I would suggest is to break endpoints into separate files via smth like this https://github.com/ardalis/ApiEndpoints

You really should compare against https://github.com/ardalis/ApiEndpoints

Trying to extend this https://github.com/fsharp/fslang-suggestions/issues/1089 to have two generics:

Basically, what I've made in Spiral. There is even a F# issue to improve the syntax.

Not currently supported but it's an open language suggestion that's likely to end up in F#. https://github.com/fsharp/fslang-suggestions/issues/506

Re: the argument accessor shorthand, there seems to be a proposal for exactly that (using _ instead of &): https://github.com/fsharp/fslang-suggestions/issues/506#issu...

I found this post (https://github.com/fsharp/fslang-suggestions/issues/975) which is about the same thing, but I'm confused as to what the final resolution was. There was mention of a taskSeq, but I can't find much info on that.

An issue in FSharp suggestions

F# doesn’t currently seem to support source generators.

"Blessed" literals: only FSharp.List and System.Array have a built-in collection syntax in the language ([ ] and [| |]). Only FSharp.List has a special pattern matching constructor (::). The language itself shouldn't favor a particular type over another: it should be possible, at the library level, to write the same code but using different collection types (related discussion here).

I mostly write F# so I can only speak for F#, but if you want you can create a module which extends Seq to add the OCaml names. I suspect the same is possible in OCaml. The authors are not trying to impede compatibility, but compatibility is not a goal. If you value compatibility, or adhering to ML norms, and you use F#, I recommend you (kindly) advocate for it in relevant issues on the F# language discussion repo. https://github.com/fsharp/fslang-suggestions/issues