Hot Chocolate VS FluentValidation

have a look here https://youtu.be/qrh97hToWpM https://chillicream.com/

There are some libraries which allows you to declare some class with more or less arbitrary methods which will be called by it at runtime. I believe many of them do that in optimal way, not just using usual reflection. One of the examples is HotChocolate library https://github.com/ChilliCream/hotchocolate . You declare class with arbitrary methods which contain arbitrary arguments. "Arbitrary" doesn mean arbitrary at all, but if parameter type is registered in DI or marked by specific attribute, it can be passed to the method.

At work we are considering using GraphQL to build our read-only data-APIs using .NET 6, EF Core and SQL Server. Looking at the ecosystem the most relevant plattforms seems to be graphql-dotnet and ChilliCream.

I'm starting a brand new project. Looks like if we want to do GraphQL in .NET, it's either graphql-dotnet or Hot Chocolate. Both look pretty good on paper.

If you know it better: Please try statically typed generated graphql queries in C# (like write the graphql queries, have a graphql schema, then get generated C# types which resemble the query, the only thing I've found that could do it was https://chillicream.com/docs/strawberryshake and there I quickly hit this bug with super simple queries containing unions: https://github.com/ChilliCream/hotchocolate/issues/4662

If you don't know Hot Chocolate framework, feel free to read about it on chillicream.com (official website) and feel free to join the great community (which is always willing to help) on slack

I love using Hot Chocolate in C# ❤

Hotchocolate GraphQL server. This is the most advanced server for a .Net environment. This article does not go into the basics and assumes some framework knowledge.

I think for the time being that's the case, yeah. I'm confirming with the great people over at https://github.com/ChilliCream/hotchocolate to see if we can somehow work around that.

Here is an example of Command handler with built-in Fluent Validation and fire and forget style:

There is an RFC called Problem Details (RFC7807) that standardizes how an error in an API should be responded to for the client. If you use Fluent validation, you may have noticed that the response is within this pattern.

here we're defining the input validation requirements using fluent validation rules. let's see what happens when the user input doesn't meet the above criteria. execute the same request in swagger with the following incorrect json content:

I remember FluentValidation being a nice library for this type of stuff.

Literally the code example in the front page: https://fluentvalidation.net/

https://www.nuget.org/packages/Newtonsoft.Json/ https://www.nuget.org/packages/AutoMapper/ https://www.nuget.org/packages/Dapper/ https://www.nuget.org/packages/FluentValidation/ https://www.nuget.org/packages/FluentAssertions/ https://www.nuget.org/packages/NUnit/ https://www.nuget.org/packages/xunit/ https://www.nuget.org/packages/YamlDotNet/ https://www.nuget.org/packages/Moq/ That is simply not true. Mature c# projects purposely maintain no downstream dependencies and is they do, it's to a major reputable lib. See for yourself - these are staple third party packages commonly used. Anything dependency starting with System or NETStandard is Microsoft maintained.

FluentValidator for validating and authorising certain fields.

Now that we know the importance of providing users with enough information about their requests and how it was processed, let’s focus on how we can configure our API to help us do that.One aspect of such meaningful experience is Request Validation (400 Error Range). For that purpose I am using a library called Fluent Validation.