Skip to content

field merging - field TYPES must not differ #979

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

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 5, 2023
Merged

field merging - field TYPES must not differ #979

merged 3 commits into from
Jan 5, 2023

Conversation

rivantsov
Copy link
Contributor

Minor correction, Editorial.

@netlify
Copy link

netlify bot commented Aug 3, 2022

Deploy Preview for graphql-spec-draft ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit d3f61c0
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/graphql-spec-draft/deploys/63b72bd546c3060008946d7b
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-979--graphql-spec-draft.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings.

Copy link
Member

@benjie benjie left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is not true; the field types do not have to be the same, they just have to be compatible. Please read http://spec.graphql.org/draft/#FieldsInSetCanMerge() carefully and consider fields with polymorphic types (unions and interfaces). The text as currently stated in the spec is, however, correct.

@rivantsov
Copy link
Contributor Author

The text as currently stated in the spec is, however, correct.

so, "scalar values must not differ" - it is correct? which values? we are at early validation stage, we do not have any values yet. I thought it should say something about types; ok, maybe not require the exact same types, then pls help to formulate the proper short phrase describing 'type' requirements

@benjie
Copy link
Member

benjie commented Aug 3, 2022

You could change the word "values" to "types" I suppose.

Co-authored-by: Benjie <benjie@jemjie.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants