Support for magic comments or functions

[Axxxx0n]

New graphql codegen client preset is not using template strings for graphql queries. It uses graphql() function with string arguments. Using this we don't get syntax highlighting.

const query = graphql(`
    query ExampleQuery {
        example {
           id
        }
    }
`)

Possible solutions:

1. Similar to g:graphql_javascript_tags option we could use something as g:graphql_javascript_function=["graphql", "gql"] and mark the string inside function for syntax highlighting

2. Use magic comment as many graphql tools and extensions do:

const query = graphql(/* GraphQL */`
    query ExampleQuery {
        example {
           id
        }
    }
`)

3. Add prefixes and document let g:graphql_javascript_tags = ["gql", "graphql", "Relay.QL", "gql(", "graphql("]

   Vim Version

NVIM v0.8.3
Build type: Release
LuaJIT 2.1.0-beta3

[jparise]

I think the g:graphql_javascript_functions = ["graphql"] approach would be the best way to handle this.

I just want to be sensitive to the number of optimistic matches we apply to JavaScript buffers in attempts to find embedded GraphQL strings.

[jparise]

We also already support a "magic" comment within the GraphQL template string:

const query = graphql(`# graphql
    query ExampleQuery {
        example {
           id
        }
    }
`)

I'm going to close this because I think it's a sufficiently good solution that doesn't involve additional code and runtime pattern matching, but please reopen if anyone feels otherwise.

[felamaslen]

We also already support a "magic" comment within the GraphQL template string

This works as long as everybody on your team uses this plugin and/or is OK with updating documents to add this spurious comment.

What if you contribute to a project where you don't have the option of making these refactors?

[dickfickling]

@jparise would you be open to a PR adding g:graphql_javascript_functions = ["graphql"]? Adding the comment is suboptimal for the reasons @felamaslen gave above. i'd be happy to contribute to the implementation, just don't want to waste my time if you don't want it.

[jparise]

Yes, I'm happy to review a change that implements something like that. I think if the default is just ["graphql"] that it shouldn't introduce much overhead beyond the current implementation.

I somewhat regret that g:graphql_javascript_tags defaults to all of ['gql', 'graphql', 'Relay.QL'] because it makes the pattern match slightly more expensive for everyone.

[jparise]

@dickfickling @felamaslen I added initial support for the graqhql() function in #109. If you have a chance to check it out, I'd be glad to know if it addressed your use cases.

[dickfickling]

Looks good! I saw an error in the vim log related to vim-graphql once right after updating the plugin, but I skipped it and haven't seen it since. I'll report back here if I see it again!

[jparise]

Looks good! I saw an error in the vim log related to vim-graphql once right after updating the plugin, but I skipped it and haven't seen it since. I'll report back here if I see it again!

Thanks! If it flashes by again, you should be able to see it in :messages.