@torokmark, have you checked my suggestion of the changes? :)

Hi Milad,

Nice approach. Though, I am a bit concerned about the followings:

1. Even though,Build interface is a general type with type param, it requires the implementor class to havesetAge,setPhone,setAddress methods.
   What if I am intended to useBuild with other type paramater likeCar. I cannot use it, since it makes me implementsetPhone inCar, but a car does not have phone number.
   In my point of view,Build is quite misleading in this way.

   Let me suggest the following.

   Let us have aBuild interface with type parameter, and this interface has only one method, likebuild(): T

namespaceBuilderPattern{exportinterfaceBuilder<T>{build():T;}// ...}

2. Director withUserBuilder parameter in its constuctor is a bit smelly in this way. Why does notmakeUser return aUser?

I would recommend the following here:

exportclassUserDirectorimplementsDirector<User>{constructor(privateuserBuilder:UserBuilder){}create():User{if(this.userBuilder.Name==='Jancsi'){this.userBuilder.setAge(12).setPhone("0123456789").setAddress("asdf");}else{this.userBuilder.setAge(0).setPhone("xxxxxxxxx").setAddress("xxxx");}returnthis.userBuilder.build()}}

Hi Mark 👋

Your approach makes much more sense to me, hence I completely agree on this. Shall i refactor with your approach in my next commit in this thread with a quick polish? 😃

@miladvafaeifard , yes please, it would be great if you did refactoring on the approach.

I am always happy to see people contributing. Thank you

Hi@torokmark,

I refactored and polished based on your suggestion. I would appreciate if you could review the change. and provide your thoughts on this.