Suggest renaming "getSession()" for clarity and better API design

[duongphuhiep]

Currently, getSession() internally calls updateSession() (sometimes), which is unexpected behavior. By convention, a function named getX() is assumed to retrieve data, not modify something else. This pattern can lead to confusion and indicates a potential design issue in the API.

Suggested quick fix

• Rename getSession() to useSession() or getOrInitSession() to reflect its side effects.
• Rename the current useSession() to useSessionAccessor() or getOrInitSessionAccessor().
  • The idea is that the SessionAccessor provides clear intent: it can both read and update session data.

This naming confusion highlights that the current functions does too much without a clear separation of concerns.

Suggested long-term improvement:

Consider treating session data like any other data entity with explicit CRUD operations:

• createSession(inputSessionData) – creates a new session in the cookies, using the inputSessionData or the data of the header
• getSession() – retrieves the session from header or cookies
• updateSession(inputSessionData) – updates session data in cookies, using the inputSessionData or the data of the header
• deleteSession() – deletes session cookies

This approach favors clarity and flexibility. Although it may require more boilerplate and might be slightly less performant than an all-in-one helper like useSessionAccessor(), it empowers consumers to manage sessions in a more deliberate and extensible way.

[pi0]

feel free to draft a PR for v2 branch to deprecate get* one and rename to create*