execute: Rename resolveField function and update comments #3159
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
to match spec
spec does not have read/write modes. although write is a reference to mutations, seems proper to not introduce new concepts within the code
IvanGoncharov
added
the
PR: polish 💅
IvanGoncharov
changed the title
IvanGoncharov
changed the title
|
@yaacovCR Thanks a lot, especially for doing small commits with meaningful descriptions 👍
|
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The function implements the "Executing Field" section of the spec and should be called
executeFieldrather thanresolveFieldto reduce ambiguity.Motivation: (1) correctness and (2) lays the groundwork for -- possibly -- providing a custom function for fields to optimize their execution, say, by not calling
getArgumentValuesif the arguments are passed unparsed to some external graphql service, or what have you.Right now, if we would add a custom
executefunction, we would have to have a code block within a function calledresolveFieldthat calls the custom execute. Resolving is a part of executing, and so there is a semantic clash that could get pretty confusing (at least for me).