Support inline fragments for diffing + remove Node refetching code

[stubailo]

TODO:

• Update CHANGELOG.md with your change
• Make sure all of the significant new logic is covered by tests
• Rebase your changes on master so that they can be merged easily
• Make sure all tests and linter rules pass

Fixes #147

[stubailo]

Note: To properly evaluate fragments, we need __typename. We can probably fake it for now, but it would be good to have #27 to make this feature work much better.

[stubailo]

@jbaxleyiii just wanted to get a sanity check from you - this PR removes a bunch of code around refetching individual nodes that we weren't actually using in the public API at all. If we put it back, it should be as a diffing plugin a la #26

Also, I left some of the old tests in a commented file, should I do that or just delete stuff altogether?

[stubailo]

Deleted the commented code, we can always get it later if we want it.

[jbaxleyiii]

@stubailo what is the goal of removing the node fetching? I thought this was being used because we ran into the need to add support for scalar arrays? (b217b84)

[stubailo]

The code you're talking about is still there: https://github.com/apollostack/apollo-client/pull/175/files#diff-f3e452947f5135c9e8a6f750e40ccb32R262

What I removed is the ability to print Relay-style node(id: 'abc') {...} queries, since those were only half-implemented.

[stubailo]

I'd like to merge this soon, let me know if I can clarify better what I'm getting rid of.

[jbaxleyiii]

@stubailo ah! I get it, 🎉 merge through!

[WilliamHolmes]

@stubailo
I'm using inline fragments ie.

node(id: 'somePersonId') {... on Person { email } }

is this now supported in 3.0.2? I'm a little confused with a previous comment ...

What I removed is the ability to print Relay-style node(id: 'abc') {...} queries, since those were only half-implemented.

and PR #179

If it's supported, this is excellent news. When do you think 3.0.2 will be published to NPM ? (I guess this is also a Q for the react-apollo module)

[stubailo]

@WilliamHolmes it should already be published, I think? Try 0.3.2.

I think my comment about Relay nodes is a bit confusing - it's safe to just ignore it, I'm just trying to say that I removed some code that didn't fully work anyway.

Inline fragments should work everywhere now, let me know if they don't.

[d-winter]

Hi @stubailo,
I have got a problem when using multiple fragments within a query:

Here is my query:

const mapQueriesToProps = ({ ownProps, state }) => {
  return {
    tableDetails: {
      query: gql`
        query table($id: ID!) {
          table(id: $id) {
            _id
            name
            apiID
            desc
            created
            updated
            owner
            fields {
              ... on NumberField {
                _id
                name
                type
                apiID
                desc
                req
              }
              ... on TextField {
                _id
                name
                apiID
                desc
                req
              }
            }
          }
        }
    `,
      variables: {
        id: ownProps.params.id,
      },
      forceFetch: false,
    },
  };
};

Using this query with graphiql works perfectly. With apollo client (v 3.2.6) there occurs the following error:

writeToStore.js:53 Uncaught Error: Can't find field type on result object ROOT_QUERY.table({"id":"577d214ce59e6dd7e7781271"}).fields.1.

The response from apollo server looks good:

{
  "data": {
    "table": {
      "_id": "577d214ce59e6dd7e7781271",
      "name": "Foo",
      "apiID": "bar",
      "desc": "1234",
      "created": "Wed Jul 06 2016 17:18:36 GMT+0200 (CEST)",
      "updated": "Wed Jul 06 2016 17:18:36 GMT+0200 (CEST)",
      "owner": "auth0|5778d3af934728da6af916ee",
      "fields": [
        {
          "_id": "577d373b5d7b8b65eecbf624",
          "name": "test number field",
          "type": "DECIMAL",
          "apiID": "tnf",
          "desc": null,
          "req": true
        },
        {
          "_id": "577d37665d7b8b65eecbf625",
          "name": "test text field",
          "apiID": "ttf",
          "desc": "fooo",
          "req": false
        }
      ]
    }
  }
}

The client seems to use the fields from within the first fragment also within the second?
I am new to graphql, so maybe this is my fault in my implementation?
Thanks a very lot for your help and this incredible project!

[stubailo]

@d-winter hey, thanks for commenting - in the future, please open a new issue since not many people will see a comment on a closed PR.

This is definitely a real bug, and someone recently opened an issue here: #354

We'll try to fix it ASAP, here's an in-progress PR: #356

[d-winter]

Hi @stubailo
sorry didn't see that issue. Thanks again!:)