Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat(package/cli): Pylon-compatible schema #2186

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

vicary
Copy link
Member

@vicary vicary commented Feb 23, 2025

This may supersedes #2056, adding @kleberbaum as a co-author.

  1. Interactive CLI
  2. CLI options
  3. Add @gqty/pylon with input conversion utilities
  4. Tests
  5. Changeset

The main goal is to avoid introducing schema changes unless absolutely required.

@vicary vicary self-assigned this Feb 23, 2025
@vicary vicary marked this pull request as draft February 23, 2025 09:46

This comment was marked as outdated.

@vicary
Copy link
Member Author

vicary commented Feb 23, 2025

@kleberbaum In #2056 I can see that params are used as the first parameter instead of the function arguments itself. I would like to hear your thoughts before making my move.

My questions mainly goes around the necessity of exporting { params, return }, let's discuss with exapmles.

# Hypothetical GraphQL schema
type Mutation {
  foo(
    required: String!
    optional: String
  ): String
}
// Pylon implementation
export const graphql = {
  Mutation: {
    foo(required: String, optional?: String) => {
      return `${required}, ${optional}`;
    }
  }
};

Currently GQty generates a mutation schema similar to the section below:

export interface Mutation {
  foo: (args: {
    required: string;
    optional?: string | null;
  }) => ScalarsEnums['String'];
}

As Pylon is built with TypeScript, required parameters must come before optionals. While we may optionally assert this fact during codegen, should it work if the generated schema exports something like this?

export interface Mutation {
  foo: (required: string, optional?: string) => string;
}

If the type above looks good, we can hide the implementation details in a generic converter which reads the generatedSchema object on the fly instead of type *ParamNames.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant