add support for useImplementingTypes

[maordaniel]

Add support for useImplementingTypes GraphQL codegen configuration.

• When a GraphQL interface is used for a field, this flag will use the implementing types, instead of the interface itself.

[ardeois]

Careful, this handleValueGeneration was added this week, are you sure it needs to be removed?

[maordaniel]

no, sorry about that.
I will fix it.
do i need to use "handleValueGeneration" in getNamedImplementType func? @ardeois

[ardeois]

Yes probably, handleValueGeneration is necessary when you use config fieldGeneration
Here is a unit test example. You should add one to make sure it works with implementing types

graphql-codegen-typescript-mock-data/tests/perTypeFieldGeneration/spec.ts

Lines 46 to 65 in 5b10387

	it('uses per field generation if field name matches', async () => {
	const result = await plugin(testSchema, [], {
	...config,
	fieldGeneration: {
	A: { email: 'internet.email' },
	},
	});
	expect(result).toBeDefined();
	// Custom generation in type A
	expect(result).toContain(
	"email: overrides && overrides.hasOwnProperty('email') ? overrides.email! : faker['internet']['email']()",
	);
	// Original generation in type B (unchanged)
	expect(result).toContain(
	"email: overrides && overrides.hasOwnProperty('email') ? overrides.email! : faker['lorem']['sentence'](),",
	);
	expect(result).toMatchSnapshot();
	});

[maordaniel]

I don't think it is related, nor is it necessary.
if someone using fieldGeneration, why use useImplementingTypes as well?
This is contrary to the idea. @ardeois

[maordaniel]

for example:

const result = await plugin(testSchema, [], { 
         ...config, 
         fieldGeneration: { 
             A: { config: 'internet.config' }, 
         }, 
     }); 
    
 expect(result).toContain(
        "config: overrides && overrides.hasOwnProperty('config') ? overrides.config! : internet.config() || internet.config(),",
    );

[maordaniel]

Ok, I've fix it.
Now if the prop useimplementingtypes is true and the fieldgeneration is not empty, the code will ignore the implant types.. i added test about that @ardeois

[ardeois]

Thanks for implementing this @maordaniel

I've got a few comments and the unit tests are failing

[maordaniel]

Thanks for implementing this @maordaniel

I've got a few comments and the unit tests are failing

Thank you for reviewing @ardeois
The unit tests that fail are not related to changes in my pr..

[ardeois]

@maordaniel tests related to your code are now failing

[maordaniel]

@maordaniel tests related to your code are now failing

Fixed and i added one more test @ardeois

[ardeois]

Sorry for the late review, I got quite busy these last few days.
I tried to do an in depth review and found potential issues.
Let me know what you think

Thanks again for the help !

[maordaniel]

Sorry for the late review, I got quite busy these last few days. I tried to do an in depth review and found potential issues. Let me know what you think

Thanks again for the help !

Hi Ardeois,
hope you are well.
i've fixed the issues you mentioned.
no problem, thanks 🙏
@ardeois

[ardeois]

Looks good ! thanks for the updates

[maordaniel]

Looks good ! thanks for the updates

Thanks a lot,
Really appreciate that ! @ardeois

I updated readme file and the snapshot for the test, pls approve this again.

[maordaniel]

Hi @ardeois ,
When are you going to merge it?

Thanks

[ardeois]

Hi @ardeois ,
When are you going to merge it?

Thanks

Sorry about that @maordaniel I forgot
It's merged !

[maordaniel]

Thanks a lot! 🙏🏻 @ardeois