add an argument for one operation seems too complex #137
Comments
|
reading the source code, I arrived to the point where we can call composeWithMongoose(scheam, {schemaComposer:OwnSC}) (knowing that OwnSC is of type server/node_modules/graphql-compose/lib/SchemaComposer.d.ts) In my point of view, the method composeWithMongoose shold be accompanied with a method eg. |
Yep, better to create a new resolver.
All Composers have a method const clonnedITC = schemaComposer.getITC('UpdateOneComplaintInput').clone('ClonnedUpdateOneComplaintInput ');
clonnedITC .addFields({ ... });
const myResolver = new schemaComposer.Resolver({
args: {
input: clonnedITC
},
...
});
I dont think that it will be a good idea. Better to modify your Typevia helper methods as you need, instead of using configuration object: const updateOneInputITC = ComplaintTC.getResolver('updateOne').getArgTC('input');
// in such way you modify type, moreover you also may remove fields
updateOneInputITC.addFields({ ... });
updateOneInputITC.removeField('password'); Assume that Take a look at TC, ITC, ETC, Resolver API: https://graphql-compose.github.io/docs/en/api-TypeComposer.html They have a buch of methods which helps programatically modify your types. Even better that it can be done via configuration object, like it did native graphql-js object constructor. With |
|
Hi @nodkz thanks for these great explanations, I was thinking about this task during the week-end (I just saw your answer right now). I was going to go to this direction of seeing how to modify the config after it was generated by mongoose. This is a great approach too (maybe it should be written in the docs to make it clear to everyone about the phylosophy of graphql-compose) : it's true it gives a lot more power to add the code you want and decorate/delegate it to the default implementations. I would have expected a configuration layer as it's in the hibernate/JPA annotations where poeple can append many frameworks (like validation, logging, security, etc...), but it's ok for me as it is today, after all, the community can make public resolvers (that eventually compose with default ones) for each task. Thanks again for your time and clarity, it's cool i've got out of this issue👍 :) |
|
Hi nodekz, I'm sorry, it's still not clear to me, what are the arguments needed for a new input: I wrote this code but it seam as if I have to register the cloned InputTC in the shemaComposer (he seams not to recognize it if I simply clone it without adding it anywhere) but it outputs: In the docs you pointed me to, I don't understand the meaning of : For example, how do I create a ComposeInputObjectTypeConfig ??? The same applies for https://graphql-compose.github.io/docs/en/api-InputTypeComposer.html#addfields How do I create a ComposeInputFieldConfigMap?? Actually I noticed, even the simplest type creation doesn't work Is it because the type must be an input as mentioned here? I saw in the source code the condition that must be met, I just don't know how to meet that and why using a type from another field (even a simple ont doesn't work): So how do I make my type a GraphQLInputObjectType ? and how do I make it an array of that input type??? p.s: please note that I naively thought that input type declaration will be the same as feld declaration described here: https://github.com/graphql-compose/graphql-compose |
|
I'm reusing the "attachments" type composer since both have the same structure (it's a complex type containing multiple fields here's its definition in mongoose, that def may evolve in time, and I want both to go parallel since removedAttachments is actually an array of attachments that were removed from the list: they have the same types by definition: I also tried to use the same type I also get an error: So I don't understand what is expected to be there since the type is already recognized byt the SC "ComplaintComplaintAttachmentsInput" as used in the fiels attachments |
updateOneInputITC.addFields({
newFields: [{
removedAttachments: { // standard GraphQL like field definition
type: updateOneInputITC.getFieldTC("attachments").clone('ComplaintComplaintRemovedAttachmentsInput ').getType(),
resolve: (source) => {console.log( "removedAttachments source value: ", source ); return null},
},
}]
});You cannot use array of js-object for field definition. You need to create InputType and then put it inside an array (if you want to make it plural): newFields: [InputTypeComposer.create({
name: '',
fields: {}
})]ComposeInputObjectTypeConfig is just Flowtype definition and can be found in the bottom of page or via search box on site: https://graphql-compose.github.io/docs/en/api-InputTypeComposer.html#composeinputobjecttypeconfig |
|
Hi @nodkz , The code you've given me doesn't work (if you look to my answer, it already has that code), I tried that too, I even tried to use a simple String Input type but I still get that
error. here's what the code you proposed outputs outputs this: To circomvert the issue, I added a field called removedAttachments to my mongoose schema that I process in a wrapResolver for updateById. But I'd like to understand why the code above is not accepted by graphql-compose, I think it's a misuse of the library to add a field in schema to make thinks work... p.s: I saw the flow declaration in the docs at the link you provided: https://graphql-compose.github.io/docs/en/api-InputTypeComposer.html#composeinputobjecttypeconfig , I'm maybe too new to js, but in my opinon this doc doesn't give a hint on how to create the field, to register in it in SchemaComposer, etc... I think a code example is worth it |
|
Good docs site with examples takes too much time. Will improve will have the bandwidth. Thanks. About the problem: updateOneInputITC.addFields({
newFields: [{ // < -------------- 🛑 cannot use a regular js object here
removedAttachmentList: { // standard GraphQL like field definition
type: updateOneInputITC.getFieldTC("attachments").clone('ComplaintComplaintRemovedAttachmentListInput ').getType(),
resolve: (source) => {console.log( "removedAttachments source value: ", source ); return null},
},
}]
});How I said before you need to create InputTypeComposer: updateOneInputITC.addFields({
newFields: [InputTypeComposer.create({
name: 'MyNewInputTypeWhichShouldBeSomehowNamed',
fields: {
removedAttachmentList: { // standard GraphQL like field definition
type: updateOneInputITC.getFieldTC("attachments").clone('ComplaintComplaintRemovedAttachmentListInput ').getType(),
resolve: (source) => {console.log( "removedAttachments source value: ", source ); return null},
},
},
})]
}); |
|
Hi @nodkz Thanks for the explanations, I didn't get it right last tim. Also, sorry for the delay, I was in holidays this last week. |
|
Hi Pavel, Srry I had some personal priorities, I wasn't able to test your solution (I added the field to the schema temporarily). I'll mark it as a closed issue since I'm convinced you answered to my problem. |
|
Hi Pavel, The last time I needed this feature, I added it to the mongoose schema (the ugly solution) Today I have this issue again, and I want to do it cleanly: I want to add two parameters to a create resolver (while the two params are not in my mongoose schema) I get an error saying but passing it createOneInputTC, createOneResolver or ComplaintActionTC both don't seem to correspond. I'm wondering why you don't call the static method InputTypeComposer.create inside the addFields() so you can be aware of the context |
|
You may use When you reading types/resolvers createOneInputTC, createOneResolver or ComplaintActionTC – they know its type registry (schemaComposer) so there is no need provide registry explicitly. BTW your code snippet a little bit strange. It can be done in such way: createOneInputTC.addFields({
complaintId: 'String',
value: 'String',
})InputTypeComposer creates complex input OBJECT type. |
|
Ok Thanks Pavel. The simple approach worked |
Hi,
I have an entity called complaint that has many attachments in it. When editing a complaint, the user may want to remove some attachments, so I want to an argument that contains the list of removed attachments to the query.
To do that, I suuposed I cannot add an argument with wrapResolve, so I decided to nest the existing updateOne resolver and take the infos from it as follows:
I have an issue with this approach :
Do i have to create an new resolver from scratch for that? (I added a qestion on SO : https://stackoverflow.com/questions/53223092/how-to-intercept-graphql-compose-mongoose-schema-creation-to-add-an-argument-in)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: