Specification constraints about parser HOT 5 CLOSED

I close this issue. I agree that it's more appropriate to have such validations in GraphQL.NET repo.

from parser.

I would leave the parsing to the parser and the validation to the validation framework within GraphQL.NET.

What I don’t like is that there is two distinct sets of AST classes - one within the parser and one within GraphQL.NET. You’d think we could create an AST library that both projects can use. Or simply use the parser AST classes for the GraphQL.NET library.

from parser.

I do not like it either. In some issue we have already talked about that with @joemcbride . It seems to me that the second set of AST classes appeared by a design mistake. I don't remember.

from parser.

#166 (comment) and #166 (comment)

from parser.

What I don’t like is that there is two distinct sets of AST classes - one within the parser and one within GraphQL.NET. You’d think we could create an AST library that both projects can use. Or simply use the parser AST classes for the GraphQL.NET library.

Fixed :)

from parser.