Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add @schema decorator to mark namespaces as GraphQL schemas #5159

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: feature/graphql
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

steverice
Copy link
Contributor

@steverice steverice commented Nov 20, 2024

Using the TypeSpec.GraphQL.@schema decorator on a namespace indicates that the decorated namespace represents a GraphQL schema that should be generated by the GraphQL emitter.

Because this allows for multiple schemas to be specified in a TypeSpec source, our test host is reworked to provide a GraphQLTestResult corresponding to each schema produced.

This commit does not actually implement any emitter functionality, but populates a state map that will be used by the emitter in the future.

Using the `TypeSpec.GraphQL.@schema` decorator on a namespace indicates that the decorated namespace represents a GraphQL schema that should be generated by the GraphQL emitter.

Because this allows for multiple schemas to be specified in a TypeSpec source, our test host is reworked to provide a `GraphQLTestResult` corresponding to each schema produced.

This commit does not actually implement any emitter functionality, but populates a state map that will be used by the emitter in the future.
Comment on lines +67 to +73
/**
* There doesn't appear to be a good way to hook into the emit process and get the GraphQLSchema
* that's produced by the emitter. So we're going to read the file that was emitted and parse it.
*
* This is the same way it's done in @typespec/openapi3:
* https://github.com/microsoft/typespec/blame/1cf8601d0f65f707926d58d56566fb0cb4d4f4ff/packages/openapi3/test/test-host.ts#L105
*/
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@bterlson do you have any other ideas here?

@bterlson bterlson marked this pull request as ready for review November 26, 2024 02:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant