Open bruno-brant opened 4 years ago
Do we really need synchronous versions of these methods? This smells like violation of ISP to me. If this interface were to be completely asynchronous, we could flawlessly implement its synchronous version.
The methods have all been inherited from Redis implementation - that's the reason for the bad naming and the existence of both sync and async methods.
Worse part is that different SDK's in other platforms might use different names (although Redis' command kinda suggest the name).
In any case, I agree with you that the synchronous method is not required. We can remove it.
Shoud we really remove it or just turn it as obsolete?
@PriscilaAvanade correct, we should always mark obsolete before deleting. Also, look at #107 and #108; We should be obsoleting the whole of LightCache
, but not before enabling our clients to use IDistributedCache
.
Method names conflict with reserved keywords an results in a warning (CA1716).