This enables accessing the Extensions field, as defined in the response
format: https://spec.graphql.org/October2021/#sec-Response-Format
Extensions can be enabled using configuration option use_extensions.
This will change the return parameters of the generated client
functions. Making it a breaking change if enabled.
Since extensions are untyped as defined in the spec, the Client will
return an interface of type map[string]interface{}.
## Summary:
I realized:
- it's simpler to avoid the usual `cmd` and just put it all in the same
directory
- we don't need schema.json since GitHub now posts a schema in SDL
format
## Test plan:
make lint example
Author: benjaminjkraft
Reviewers: dnerdy, StevenACoffman, aberkan, jvoll, mahtabsabet, MiguelCastillo
Required Reviewers:
Approved By: dnerdy, StevenACoffman
Checks: ✅ Test (1.17), ✅ Test (1.16), ✅ Test (1.15), ✅ Test (1.14), ✅ Lint, ✅ Test (1.17), ✅ Test (1.16), ✅ Test (1.15), ✅ Test (1.14), ✅ Lint
Pull Request URL: https://github.com/Khan/genqlient/pull/89
## Summary:
We had this setting called "scalars", which said: bind this GraphQL type
to this Go type, rather than the one you would normally use. It's
called that because it's most useful for custom scalars, where "the one
you would normally use" is "error: unknown scalar". But nothing ever
stopped you from using it for a non-scalar type. I was planning on
removing this functionality, because it's sort of a rough edge, but a
discussion with Craig found some good use cases, so instead, in this
commit, I document it better and add some slightly nicer ways to specify
it.
Specifically, here are a few potential non-scalar use cases:
- bind a GraphQL enum to a nonstandard type (or even `string`)
- bind an input type to some type that has exactly the fields you want;
this acts as a sort of workaround for issues #14 and #44
- bind an object type to your own struct, so as to add methods to it
(this is the use case Craig raised)
- bind an object type to your own struct, so as to share it between
multiple queries (I believe named fragments will address this case
better, but it doesn't hurt to have options)
- bind a GraphQL list type to a non-slice type in Go (presumably one
with an UnmarshalJSON method), or any other different structure
The latter three cases still have the sharp edge I was originally
worried about, which is that nothing guarantees that the fields you
request in the query are the ones the type expects to get. But I think
it's worth having the option, with appropriate disclaimers.
The main change to help support that better is that you can now specify
the type inline in the query, as an alternative to specifying it in the
config file; this means you might map a given object to a given struct,
but only in some cases, and when you do you have a chance to look at the
list of fields you're requesting.
Additionally, I renamed the config field from "scalars" to "bindings"
(but mentioned it in a few places where you might go looking for how to
map scalars, most importantly the error message you get for an unknown
(custom) scalar). While I was making a breaking change, I also changed
it to be a `map[string]<struct>` instead of a `map[string]string`,
because I expect to add more fields soon, e.g. to handle issue #38.
Finally, since the feature is now intended/documented, I added some
tests, although it's honestly quite simple on the genqlient side.
## Test plan:
make tesc
Author: benjaminjkraft
Reviewers: csilvers, aberkan, dnerdy, MiguelCastillo
Required Reviewers:
Approved by: csilvers
Checks: ⌛ Test (1.17), ⌛ Test (1.16), ⌛ Test (1.15), ⌛ Test (1.14), ⌛ Test (1.13), ⌛ Lint, ⌛ Test (1.17), ⌛ Test (1.16), ⌛ Test (1.15), ⌛ Test (1.14), ⌛ Test (1.13), ⌛ Lint
Pull request URL: https://github.com/Khan/genqlient/pull/69
## Summary:
We have lots of tests covering codegen, but not a lot that actually run
the code. For things where all we do is generate types, that's (mostly)
fine (especially now that we actually build the code), but as we
generate more nontrivial non-type code we need to actually run it.
So I wrote some integration tests that spin up a little gqlgen
server, and make calls to it; we can add more over time especially as
the JSON marshalling logic gets complex (to support fragments).
They're more work to write than the snapshot tests, but of course they
can test a lot more.
In addition to gqlgen, I pulled in testify assert/require, because I
really wanted to be able to use assert.Equal and such for these. I
didn't bother converting existing tests, although I assume they will
become useful elsewhere in time. Both gqlgen and testify are of course
only used in tests.
Fixes#21 and #24.
Issue: https://github.com/Khan/genqlient/issues/21
Issue: https://github.com/Khan/genqlient/issues/24
## Test plan:
make check
Author: benjaminjkraft
Reviewers: aberkan, dnerdy, benjaminjkraft, csilvers, MiguelCastillo
Required Reviewers:
Approved by: aberkan, dnerdy
Checks: ✅ Test (1.17), ✅ Test (1.16), ✅ Test (1.15), ✅ Test (1.14), ✅ Test (1.13), ✅ Lint, ✅ Test (1.17), ✅ Test (1.16), ✅ Test (1.15), ✅ Test (1.14), ✅ Test (1.13), ✅ Lint
Pull request URL: https://github.com/Khan/genqlient/pull/50
Jan-Hendrik Boll