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

Extra operators should be available on top level only (@sortBy) #118

Closed
LastDragon-ru opened this issue Jan 11, 2024 · 0 comments · Fixed by #129
Closed

Extra operators should be available on top level only (@sortBy) #118

LastDragon-ru opened this issue Jan 11, 2024 · 0 comments · Fixed by #129
Assignees
Labels
! Breaking change pkg: graphql scope: feat New feature or request
Milestone

Comments

@LastDragon-ru
Copy link
Owner

Makes no sense to have

order: [
    {random: yes},
    {field: {random: yes}},
],

Probably we can create an additional type for the root field (where order argument is defined) that will contain fields and extra operators. It will also allow to have property field with all fields and avoid name conflicts (current version will throw an error if the field with the same name as extra operator exists).

@LastDragon-ru LastDragon-ru added scope: feat New feature or request pkg: graphql ! Breaking change labels Jan 11, 2024
@LastDragon-ru LastDragon-ru changed the title Extra operators should be available only on top level (@sortBy) Extra operators should be available only on top level only (@sortBy) Jan 11, 2024
@LastDragon-ru LastDragon-ru changed the title Extra operators should be available only on top level only (@sortBy) Extra operators should be available on top level only (@sortBy) Jan 11, 2024
@LastDragon-ru LastDragon-ru added this to the Next milestone Feb 8, 2024
@LastDragon-ru LastDragon-ru self-assigned this Feb 8, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
! Breaking change pkg: graphql scope: feat New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant