Could be a better way of doing it without changing the signature of the model? ```fun createDummyPr...

# announcements

[Pablo]

Could be a better way of doing it without changing the signature of the model?

fun createDummyProduct(number: Int = 1) = Product(id = "id$number", name = "name$number", title = "title$number")

[nanodeath]

that looks pretty expressive to me already

[Pablo]

How could I create like a fake Product?

[Pablo]

For example, I want this for test purpose

[nanodeath]

isn't that what you're already doing?

[Pablo]

Yes, but it's not efficient as you said, right?

[Pablo]

How could I create like a fake Product given an int or something to be able to create more than one

[ephemient]

with(Product::class.primaryConstructor!!) {
    callBy(parameters.associateWith { "${it.name}$number" })
}

[nanodeath]

val products = List(100) { createDummyProduct(it) }

[ephemient]

(reflection) not really better and will fail spectacularly under any number of situations

[Pablo]

Wow, not looking for reflection tbh

[ephemient]

but if it's just for a test then maybe.

[nanodeath]

sometimes the "you can do that, but it's terrible" answer isn't the best answer 😄

[ephemient]

what do you want, then?

[Pablo]

I don't know, another way, if it's possible efficient one, because Max said it's "expensive"

[Nir]

this seems like it would be fast enough, easily, for any test situation

[Nir]

you could just take a string and use the same string for all three fields

[Nir]

or take an int, create one string from it, and use it for all 3 fields

[Nir]

that would be faster but make it harder to debug potentially...

[Pablo]

ok thanks guys 😄