Current implementation always uses POST as the transport mechanism. Adding GET support enables usage of GET queries for caching simply via URL.
Some notes:
- I left the existing API for creating a new client as is, but the implementation could be much cleaner by introducing some sort of configuration struct when creating a new client
- The construction of the query parameters follows the logic from Apollo's client implementation, which can be found here https://github.com/apollographql/apollo-client/blob/8beb4820edc6352996e08f7f73bde3573f1eb666/src/link/http/rewriteURIForGET.ts
- Updated integration tests to use both sets of clients. Updating the tests to use a test suite would be cleaner
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:
In this commit I refactor the argument-generation logic to move most of
the code out of the template and into the type-generator. This logic
predates #51, and I didn't think to update it there, but I think it
benefits from similar treatment, for similar reasons.
Specifically, the main change is to treat variables as another struct
type we can generate, rather than handling them inline as a
`map[string]interface{}`. Users still pass them the same way, but
instead of putting them into a `map[string]interface{}` and JSONifying
that, we generate a struct and put them there.
This turns out to simplify things quite a lot, because we already have a
lot of code to generate types. Notably, the omitempty code goes from a
dozen lines to basically two, and fixes a bug (#43) in the process,
because now that we have a struct, `json.Marshal` will do our work for
us! (And, once we have syntax for it (#14), we'll be able to handle
field-level omitempty basically for free.) More importantly, it will
simplify custom marshalers (#38, forthcoming) significantly, since we do
all that logic at the containing-struct level, but will need to apply it
to arguments.
It does require two breaking changes:
1. For folks implementing the `graphql.Client` API (rather than just
calling `NewClient`): we now pass them variables as an `interface{}`
rather than a `map[string]interface{}`. For most callers, including
Khan/webapp, this is basically a one-line change to the signature of
their `MakeRequest`, and it should be a lot more future-proof.
2. genqlient's handling of the `omitempty` option has changed to match
that of `encoding/json`, in particular it now never considers structs
"empty". The difference was never intentional (I just didn't realize
that behavior of `encoding/json`); arguably our behavior was more
useful but I think that's outweighed by the value of consistency with
`encoding/json` as well as the simpler and more correct
implementation (fixing #43 is actually quite nontrivial otherwise).
Once we have custom unmarshaler support (#38), users will be able to
map a zero value to JSON null if they wish, which is mostly if not
entirely equivalent for GraphQL's purposes.
Issue: https://github.com/Khan/genqlient/issues/38
Issue: https://github.com/Khan/genqlient/issues/43
## Test plan:
make check
Author: benjaminjkraft
Reviewers: StevenACoffman, dnerdy, aberkan, jvoll, mahtabsabet, MiguelCastillo
Required Reviewers:
Approved By: StevenACoffman, dnerdy
Checks: ✅ Test (1.17), ✅ Test (1.16), ✅ Test (1.15), ✅ Test (1.14), ✅ Lint, ✅ Lint, ✅ Test (1.17), ✅ Test (1.16), ✅ Test (1.15), ✅ Test (1.14)
Pull Request URL: https://github.com/Khan/genqlient/pull/103
## Summary:
In this commit, I add a bunch more documentation of how to use
genqlient, including a getting started guide, and a FAQ that also acts
as a how-to shaped index of common configuration options and extension
points. Much of this is adapted from the internal doc I wrote at Khan,
or reorganized from what was in the README. Speaking of which, now that
there are better places for all the details, I rewrote the README to be
a bit more of an overview and index of other documentation. (For now I
left the "unmaintained" notes, which I'll remove fairly soon once all
our ducks are in a row.)
Fixes#26, #39.
Issue: https://github.com/Khan/genqlient/issues/26
Issue: https://github.com/Khan/genqlient/issues/39
## Test plan:
make check, read the docs
Author: benjaminjkraft
Reviewers: mahtabsabet, benjaminjkraft, aberkan, dnerdy, jvoll, MiguelCastillo
Required Reviewers:
Approved By: mahtabsabet
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/86
* Picking some nits that my IDE complained about
Signed-off-by: Steve Coffman <[email protected]>
* Update graphql/util.go
Co-authored-by: Ben Kraft <[email protected]>
* revert to original for comment
Signed-off-by: Steve Coffman <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Ben Kraft <[email protected]>
## Summary:
It would be nice to have some linting beyond `go vet`! Now we do. I
started by copying the config from Khan/webapp. I did remove a couple
of staticcheck checks that I didn't feel were useful. (Note also that
exportloopref is the replacement for scopelint in newer golangci-lint.)
Included are all the needed lint fixes; most are stylistic but the
changes in the example are a (minor) bugfix.
Fixes#22.
Issue: https://github.com/Khan/genqlient/issues/22
## 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/49
