Feature request: receiving plain JSON Objects / strings as response about bunq

[dennisdegreef]

Hi @StephanMeijer

I think it would be possible to be able to json_encode these objects, and if not, implement such behaviour.
Do you have a usecase for this? Why do you prefer plain JSON objects instead of complex types?
The reason the complex types are there, is to assert certain behaviour/structure.

[StephanMeijer]

I prefer JSON for the cases where things like Invoice are not implemented yet.

[dennisdegreef]

Wouldn't it be better to implement Invoice in those case? Instead of having to maintain the JSON views as well?

[StephanMeijer]

You already receive JSON from the API, so you actually don't have to maintain a thing.

[dennisdegreef]

While that is true, why not use the API directly then? Are there some components in this API that might fit better in a separate package? I guess the guzzle middleware might? Please let me know what things you'd like to use from this package while keeping communication JSON based.

[dennisdegreef]

Closed due to inactivity. Please feel free to comment on my previous questions.