CopyWith method generated on fields in fragments expect functions rather than values themselves about graphql_codegen HOT 7 CLOSED

Alright, how would you express these two cases with your approach:

• copy with overwriting a nullable value with null?
• copy with preserving a nullable value?

from graphql_codegen.

To be honest I'm not very sure how it is implemented but I have seen freezed managing to do what you mentioned despite its copyWith taking in values. I even tested it now and it seems to satisfy both the points you've mentioned.

I created a simple person class

@freezed
class Person with _$Person{
  const factory Person({
    required String? firstName,
    required String? lastName,
  }) = _Person;
}

and ran this test against it

test('Overwriting a nullable value with null', () {
  Person person = const Person(
    firstName: 'John',
    lastName: 'Doe',
  );

  Person person2 = person.copyWith(
    firstName: null,
  );

  expect(person.firstName, 'John');
  expect(person2.firstName, null);

  expect(person.lastName, 'Doe');
  expect(person2.lastName, 'Doe');
});

As far as I understood your question this satisfies it

• The firstName property has been overwritten with a null
• The secondName property is a nullable that's been preserved

Complete freezed file generated for the Person class: https://gist.github.com/Hari-07/11d5ce80eae042663a792877ba6b9d28

Additionally there's also a nice deepcopy on it that'd be quite useful too: https://github.com/rrousselGit/freezed#going-further-deep-copy

from graphql_codegen.

Thank you for sharing this! It's definitely a good source of improvement and I like the deep copy functionality.

from graphql_codegen.

Rather than reinvent the wheel, it might be easier for you to create freezed classes from the graphql file and then let it handle the utility methods on it. It'll add a dependency, but I think it's worth it

from graphql_codegen.

I think that's a trade off. Generally, I'd like to reduce the number of runtime dependencies and get more control over the generated output, moving to freezed is not in line with this.

Furthermore, we're in a unique position to implement this our selves in a more efficient way, because we have a very limited domain to cover. We have full control over the classes and can make anything happen.

Lastly, this work is not super complicated, I've already implemented a better copyWith and have the deep copy implementation pending.

from graphql_codegen.

That's awesome to hear! Looking forward to your updates

from graphql_codegen.

Released new copyWith and deep copy in 0.10.0-beta.2

from graphql_codegen.