You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 27, 2023. It is now read-only.
Any chance ya'll be open to an option that would allow outputting Type names without an _? We always renaming types to avoid a lint error, which is admittedly a small thing, but would be nice to have a more idiomatic naming scheme
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
No just fragment names themselves, This isn't something the compiler does of course, but since relay tends to insist on specfically named fragments, we end up with MyModule_prop a lot, which is fine as a fragment name but awkward as a type name used in JS
I’m on the fence about it. Just yesterday I filed #132 and we ended up deciding to keep those type-alias names as-is. FWIW No team member of mine has ever asked me about the naming, thus far but I do know they sometimes copy the fragment name to use as type name.
I guess after writing that, I’m leaning more against. While awkward, consistency can sometimes be more helpful.
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Any chance ya'll be open to an option that would allow outputting Type names without an
_
? We always renaming types to avoid a lint error, which is admittedly a small thing, but would be nice to have a more idiomatic naming schemeThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: