Possible to remove Maybe & Scalars types in favor of number | null and inlined Scalar values?

[ericbiewener]

Rather than the creation of type Maybe<T> = T | null, is it possible to just inline the | null everywhere it is used? Same with the type Scalars. To clarify:

Current output:

Maybe<Scalars["String"]>

Desired output:

string | null

I'd also be interested to know if there is an advantage to the current approach.

[dotansimha]

Hi @ericbiewener , we are already thinking about adding this feature.
Please see my comment here: #1904 (comment)

[cothman]

Same here, is the Maybe type removed or at least configurable!

Let's suppose I'm developing a Service Layer that handles the service layer communication and all I want are types to type my queries or mutation.
It's a headache if I want to use generated types without using generated queries or mutation.

Here's a case where I'm typing my state depending on query's result.

type TopicsState = {
  suggestedTopics: Maybe<DisplaySuggestedTopic>[] | null | undefined;
};

[omarbenmegdoul]

Is this still in the cards, or perhaps already implemented? If not, is it doable for me to create a plugin to achieve this? @dotansimha is #1904 really the same problem? Seems like it was dealt with but this one remains

[adamtaylor13]

I looked at #2107, and it doesn't seem to resolve the originally asked question. Ideally, I'd like for the generated type files to just inline Maybe whenever possible. For example, currently the behavior is:

export type Maybe<T> = T | undefined;
/** All built-in and custom scalars, mapped to their actual values */
export type Scalars = {
  ID: string;
  String: string;
  Boolean: boolean;
  Int: number;
  Float: number;
};
export type User = {
  __typename?: 'User';
  email: Scalars['String'];
  id: Scalars['String'];
  name: Scalars['String'];
  profilePictureUrl?: Maybe<Scalars['String']>;
};

But, I'd really like to ability to simply generate:

export type User = {
  __typename?: 'User';
  email: string;
  id: string;
  name: string;
  profilePictureUrl?: string | undefined;
};

Is there some trade-off here between the two that I don't understand?

[ryancarloscorrea]

@adamtaylor13 Did you find any solution?

[adamtaylor13]

@ryancarloscorrea Unfortunately not ☹️

[venkatd]

I would like the same as @adamtaylor13 the readability of the types is more confusing for others on our team and simply inlining the types (as though I was writing them by hand) would be the ideal.

I could hack it with some regexp find/replace but would rather have an option for this!

What is the advantage to having the extra scalars layer?

[denakol]

Hi! no news regarding it? Types are quite ugly.

[jhopley-stadion]

Yea it would be pretty good to have config to remove this. Really annoying and forcing me to cast types when doing transforms,