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

Define a record type and mapping to schema type, as an alternative to tagging #66

Closed
hlship opened this issue May 13, 2017 · 0 comments
Closed
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@hlship
Copy link
Member

hlship commented May 13, 2017

Especially now that tagging involved a new wrapper type, rather than meta-data, it's gotten a bit intrusive.

With a little more declaration in the schema, we could relate a GraphQL object type to a Clojure record type (or even Java class).

This would allow Lacinia to inuit the object type when dealing with a union or interface type.

@hlship hlship changed the title Define a record type as an alternative to tagging Define a record type and mapping to schema type, as an alternative to tagging May 30, 2017
@hlship hlship self-assigned this Dec 21, 2017
@hlship hlship added this to the 0.24.0 milestone Dec 21, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant