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{}.
Multiple schema-files are now supported as of #134, but the support was
a bit different from how we did multiple operation-files. Before anyone
starts to depend on the ways the syntaxes differ, let's just make them
the same. Since it's easy, I also added support for having just a
single operations-file.
I also realized while writing this that the type-change is technically
breaking (if you call from Go), so documented it as such. I think
this is unlikely to affect many people.
Test plan: make check
## Summary:
This is useful if you want to bind to a type you don't control (or use
for other things) but need different serialization than its default.
This is a feature gqlgen has and we've found it very useful. For
example, in webapp we want to bind `DateTime` to `time.Time`, but its
default serialization is not compatible with Python, so currently we
have to bind to a wrapper type and cast all over the place, which is
exactly the sort of boilerplate genqlient is supposed to avoid.
For unmarshaling, the implementation basically just follows the existing
support for abstract types; instead of calling our own generated
helper, we now call your specified function. This required some
refactoring to abstract the handling of custom unmarshalers generally
from abstract types specifically, and to wire in not only the
unmarshaler-name but also the `generator` (in order to compute the right
import alias).
For marshaling, I had to implement all that stuff over again; it's
mostly parallel to unmarshaling (and I made a few minor changes to
unmarshaling to make the two more parallel). Luckily, after #103 I at
least only had to do it once, rather than implementing the same
functionality for arguments and for input-type fields. It was still
quite a bit of code; I didn't try to be quite as completionist about the
tests as with unmarshal but still had to add a few.
Issue: https://github.com/Khan/genqlient/issues/38
## Test plan:
make check
Author: benjaminjkraft
Reviewers: StevenACoffman, dnerdy, benjaminjkraft, aberkan, jvoll, mahtabsabet, MiguelCastillo
Required Reviewers:
Approved By: StevenACoffman, dnerdy
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/104
## Summary:
In this commit I begin the journey to add the long-awaited support for
interfaces (part of #8). Well, it's not the beginning: I already had
some half-written broken code around. But it's the first fully
functional support, and especially, the first *tested* support; it's
probably best to review the nontrivially-changed code as if it were new.
Conceptually, the code so far is pretty simple: we generate an interface
type, and the implementations. (That code is in fact mostly unchanged.)
The complexity comes in because encoding/json doesn't know how to
unmarshal that. So we have to add an UnmarshalJSON method, which
actually has to be on the types with interface-type fields, that knows
how. I factored it into two methods, such that that UnmarshalJSON
method is just glue, and then there's a separate function, corresponding
to each interface-type, that actually does all the work. (If only one
could just write it as an actual method!) The method uses the same
trick suggested to me by a few others in another context to deserialize
all but one field, then handle that field specially, which is discussed
in the code.
This still has some limitations, which will be lifted in future commits:
- it doesn't allow for list-of-interface fields
- it requires that you manually ask for `__typename`
- it doesn't support fragments, i.e. you can only query for interface
fields, not concrete-type-specific ones
But it works, even in integration tests, which is progress!
As a part of this, I added a proper config option for the "allow broken
features" flag, since I need to be able to set it from the integration
tests which are in a separate package (and actually shell out via `go
generate`). I also renamed what was to be the first case
(InterfaceNoFragments), and replaced it with a further-simplified
version (avoiding list-of-interface fields.
[1] https://github.com/benjaminjkraft/notes/blob/master/go-json-interfaces.md
Issue: https://github.com/Khan/genqlient/issues/8
## Test plan:
make tesc
Author: benjaminjkraft
Reviewers: dnerdy, benjaminjkraft, aberkan, csilvers, MiguelCastillo
Required Reviewers:
Approved by: 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/52
## 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
