namespace DbFirst.Application.Catalogs;

//TODO: create generic service to reduce code duplication

/* Copilot's Response:
A generic CRUD base service adds little value in your case:

Pros:
• Less boilerplate for simple entities without special logic.
• Uniform CRUD signatures.

Cons/Practical here:
• Domain logic differs per entity(unique title check, setting audit fields, forbidding title changes, stored procs with output GUID).
• Generic services tend to be diluted by virtual methods/hooks for special cases—ending up with per-entity overrides and little real gain.
• With stored procedures and output parameters, the pattern doesn’t fit cleanly because operations aren’t symmetric (separate procs for insert/update/delete).

Conclusion: For this solution a generic service would be more overhead than benefit. If you later have multiple very similar entities without special logic,
you could consider a lightweight generic interface/base; for now, the specialized service implementation is cleaner. */

public interface ICatalogService
{
    Task<List<CatalogReadDto>> GetAllAsync(CancellationToken cancellationToken = default);
    Task<CatalogReadDto?> GetByIdAsync(int id, CancellationToken cancellationToken = default);
    Task<CatalogReadDto?> CreateAsync(CatalogWriteDto dto, CancellationToken cancellationToken = default);
    Task<CatalogReadDto?> UpdateAsync(int id, CatalogWriteDto dto, CancellationToken cancellationToken = default);
    Task<bool> DeleteAsync(int id, CancellationToken cancellationToken = default);
}