Ericnr
Ericnr
Cool! Feel free to close this issue or use it to track the development of these directives
@bvaughn can this be addressed? Concurrent mode is coming and it'd be nice if the library worked smoothly with it.
This would be my preferred way to define the schema too
strange that this has not been addressed yet, is it solved in v3?
> @kunjee17 @LegNeato @jmpunkt I think [the new design](https://github.com/graphql-rust/juniper/issues/553#issuecomment-624544235) described in #553 will solve this issue too without providing any flattening capabilities. Simply, it will allow to specify multiple `impl`...
Async-graphql was able to achieve this, albeit its not as simple as having multiple impl blocks https://async-graphql.github.io/async-graphql/en/merging_objects.html, but Ive been using it anyway. @tyranron has there been advancements with that...
I was asked for some examples of use cases, here are some. ```ts interface TExtensions { authorize?: (ctx: TContext) => boolean; authenticate?: boolean; } const t = createTypesFactory({ extensions: {...
yea, thats a totally fair decision. These are quality of life features only that could make the complexity explode
@n1ru4l that'd be nice. I'm currently trying to wrap gqtx's api into an api which is more pleasing and with better defaults (imo) ex: ```ts string: (opts?: { nullable: T;...
I'm not great with complex types, but I explored it for a little bit with a type that would be returned by .List and .NonNull ```ts export type AllType =...