Nats::Server shouldn't be called that way

[FCO]

It's not a server, it shouldn't be called that way, maybe something like:

• Nats::Client
• Nats::Connection
• Nats::Service

[FCO]

Usage example for that class: https://github.com/FCO/nats/blob/3f943f1c4d684fd2cd67c1b87f740406a429b547/examples/cro-like.raku#L17

[dontlaugh]

There are many official clients, so really you ought to follow their lead.

I would not call this "Server". Perhaps Subscriber or Subscription. Unless you intend to totally re-implement nats-server, everything here is a client concern.

It's confusing at first, because EVERYTHING is a client, except the NATS server itself.

[dontlaugh]

https://github.com/nats-io/nats.deno/blob/main/examples/nats-sub.ts#L61-L64 example

Note that the official NATS libraries expose multiple APIs that do the same thing, but at different levels of detail.

Consider this:
https://github.com/nats-io/nats.go/blob/main/examples/nats-sub/main.go#L99-L110

The Conn object has a high-level subscribe method that accepts a callback.

But while that example throws away the *Subscription object, be aware that Subscription exposes an iterator-style API for getting messages as well (lower level with more control) https://github.com/nats-io/nats.go/blob/main/nats.go#L4517

After some thought, I think you should rework it as the Connection class and this method: https://github.com/nats-io/nats.go/blob/main/nats.go#L4083

[FCO]

I’ve renamed Nats::Server to Nats::Client and also renamed Nats::Route to Nats::Subscriptions (there is already a Nats::Subscription).