Example for defining nested object without creating type?

[theogravity]

I remember reading there's an example for this somewhere either in the docs or in the GH issues/discussion, but can't seem to find it.

The use-case was around args or inputs that might contain nested objects - rather than defining a separate type for each one, you can use some method to define it within the input itself.

[hayes]

This is not something that currently exists. GraphQL doesn't have a way to represent nested objects without giving them a type. There were some ideas around creating a method for defining types inline, but there were some issues getting the API to work. Closest thing is the with-input plugin (not merged, open as a PR) but that's not quite the same thing

[theogravity]

I also thought the same (you need a type for every nested object); I must have been dreaming it. Thanks!

[theogravity]

I think I was thinking of the simple objects plugin

https://giraphql.com/plugins/simple-objects

[Joelkang]

For anyone else coming to this discussion, i had a similar desire, and wanted to do something like this query, but separate out the resolvers for fruits and vegetables.

query typeaheadQuery($query: String!) {
   typeahead {
      fruits (input: $query) {
        name
      }
      vegetables (input: $query) {
        name
      }
   }
}

Following this discussion, I wound up doing this:

const TypeaheadRoot = builder.simpleObject('TypeaheadRoot', {});

builder.queryField('typeahead', (t) =>
  t.field({
    type: TypeaheadRoot,
    resolve: () => ({}),
  }),
);

builder.objectField(SearchRoot, 'fruits', (t) => t.field({
  type: ['Fruit'],
  resolve: () => { 
    // resolve fruits
    return [{ name: 'Orange' }];
 },
}))

builder.objectField(SearchRoot, 'vegetables', (t) => t.field({
  type: ['Vegetable'],
  resolve: () => { 
    // resolve vegetables 
   return [{ name: 'Broccoli' }];
  },
}))