In the GraphQL spec, objects and input objects are distinct things. Quoting the spec for input objects: Fields can define arguments that the client passes up with the query, to configure their behavior. These inputs can be Strings or Enums, but they sometimes need to be more complex than this. The Object type… is inappropriate … Read more
You can definitely query with an array of values! Here’s what the query itself would look like: { events(containsId: [1,2,3]) { … } } And the type would look something like: const eventsType = new GraphQLObjectType({ name: ‘events’, type: // your type definition for events, args: { containsId: new GraphQLList(GraphQLID) }, … }); If you … Read more
Have a look at custom scalars: https://www.apollographql.com/docs/graphql-tools/scalars.html create a new scalar in your schema: scalar Date type MyType { created: Date } and create a new resolver: import { GraphQLScalarType } from ‘graphql’; import { Kind } from ‘graphql/language’; const resolverMap = { Date: new GraphQLScalarType({ name: ‘Date’, description: ‘Date custom scalar type’, parseValue(value) { … Read more
As of the time of writing, there isn’t a built-in feature in GraphQL-JS or Apollo Server to handle this concern, but it’s something that should definitely have a simple solution as GraphQL becomes more popular. This concern can be addressed with several approaches at several levels of the stack, and should also always be combined … Read more
It looks like the grammar allows default values on input object types, so you can declare input ExampleInput { value: Int = 0 another: String isAvailable: Boolean = false } The spec is clear that default values exist and explains how they get used (first bullet under “Input Coercion”). (Whether any specific tooling supports this … Read more
The query name doesn’t have any meaning on the server whatsoever. It’s only used for clients to identify the responses (since you can send multiple queries/mutations in a single request). In fact, you can send just an anonymous query object if that’s the only thing in the GraphQL request (and doesn’t have any parameters): { … Read more
No, the spec does not allow input types to implement interfaces. And GraphQL type system in general does not define any form of inheritance (the extends keyword adds fields to an existing type, and isn’t for inheritance). The spec is intentionally constrained to stay simple. This means that you’re stuck repeating fields across input types. … Read more
It looks like there is now https://www.npmjs.com/package/graphql-docs Dynamically generated documentation explorer for GraphQL schemas. It aims to provide a better overview of a schema than GraphiQL, but without querying features. You can also generate a static documentation file based on a schema file or GraphQL endpoint: npm install -g graphql-docs graphql-docs-gen http://GRAPHQL_ENDPOINT documentation.html
In the context of that example, login should be a Query instead of a Mutation assuming its resolver has no side-effects, at least according to the spec. However, there’s a couple of reasons you probably won’t see that done in the wild: If you’re implementing authentication, you’ll probably want to log your users’ account activity, … Read more
You would define a new GraphQL type that is an object that contains a list and a number. The number would be defined by a resolver function. On your GraphQL server you can define the resolver function and as part of that, you would have to write the code that performs whatever calculations and queries … Read more