-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 822
Add support for custom global ID in v2 (Issue #1276) #1278
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
Closed
tcleonard
wants to merge
3
commits into
graphql-python:v2
from
tcleonard:issue-#1276_allow_other_identifiers_v2.1.8
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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 file contains hidden or 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 file contains hidden or 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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,77 @@ | ||
from graphql_relay import from_global_id, to_global_id | ||
|
||
from ..types import ID, UUID | ||
from ..types.base import BaseType | ||
|
||
from typing import Type | ||
|
||
|
||
class BaseGlobalIDType: | ||
""" | ||
Base class that define the required attributes/method for a type. | ||
""" | ||
|
||
graphene_type = ID # type: Type[BaseType] | ||
|
||
@classmethod | ||
def resolve_global_id(cls, info, global_id): | ||
# return _type, _id | ||
raise NotImplementedError | ||
|
||
@classmethod | ||
def to_global_id(cls, _type, _id): | ||
# return _id | ||
raise NotImplementedError | ||
|
||
|
||
class DefaultGlobalIDType(BaseGlobalIDType): | ||
""" | ||
Default global ID type: base64 encoded version of "<node type name>: <node id>". | ||
""" | ||
|
||
graphene_type = ID | ||
|
||
@classmethod | ||
def resolve_global_id(cls, info, global_id): | ||
return from_global_id(global_id) | ||
|
||
@classmethod | ||
def to_global_id(cls, _type, _id): | ||
return to_global_id(_type, _id) | ||
|
||
|
||
class SimpleGlobalIDType(BaseGlobalIDType): | ||
""" | ||
Simple global ID type: simply the id of the object. | ||
To be used carefully as the user is responsible for ensuring that the IDs are indeed global | ||
(otherwise it could cause request caching issues). | ||
""" | ||
|
||
graphene_type = ID | ||
|
||
@classmethod | ||
def resolve_global_id(cls, info, global_id): | ||
_type = info.return_type.graphene_type._meta.name | ||
return _type, global_id | ||
|
||
@classmethod | ||
def to_global_id(cls, _type, _id): | ||
return _id | ||
|
||
|
||
class UUIDGlobalIDType(BaseGlobalIDType): | ||
""" | ||
UUID global ID type. | ||
By definition UUID are global so they are used as they are. | ||
""" | ||
|
||
graphene_type = UUID | ||
|
||
@classmethod | ||
def resolve_global_id(cls, info, global_id): | ||
_type = info.return_type.graphene_type._meta.name | ||
return _type, global_id | ||
|
||
@classmethod | ||
def to_global_id(cls, _type, _id): | ||
return _id |
This file contains hidden or 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think this will work if the return type is an interface or a union. I think it will return the interface/union type rather than the underling result type.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
you are probably correct... I will add a unit test for that and try to figure out a solution.
Let me know if you have an idea to suggest
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You can't have a Union be a node so I don't think the union is really something we need to consider (unless I am missing your point), I'm looking into interfaces
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually same comment about interfaces... I don't really see why an interface would be a Node... it's the object type that you would derive from the interface that you would make a node field.
Did you have a specific case in mind? Cause I can't write a unit test that makes sense to test that...