Handle json objects without properties as scalars #79
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
This looks like it would fix my problem too. Any chance this could get reviewed? Perhaps add some integration tests with the PR. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
First off, this could be regarded as an opinionated change, so I understand if it's not accepted for that reason alone. I also haven't included tests for it, which I'm happy to do if it's acceptable.
Objection and JSON schemas in general can handle nested JSON objects. I use these (with
additionalProperties: true) in my schemas to correspond withjson/jsonbcolumns in Postgres.However, GraphQL chokes when provided with a property of type
objectwithout properties. This proposed change uses thegraphql-type-jsonlibrary to handle properties of typeobjectas JSON scalar objects when their properties are not defined.My opinion is that this is inline with how GraphQL would expect such unspecified objects in the schema, but I'm interested in seeing if there are other opinions.