-
Updated
Dec 16, 2020 - TypeScript
codegen
Here are 342 public repositories matching this topic...
-
Updated
Dec 7, 2020 - Swift
One of the specific advantages of the wire approach is that it generates code that's relatively readable compared to reflect-based equivalents. When wire.Value is used on a small by-value type, there's no need for the value to live in a global variable - the expression could instead be used literally inside the generated code, which would make the code easier to follow, and more similar to the c
-
Updated
Dec 11, 2020 - TypeScript
-
Updated
Mar 9, 2019 - JavaScript
-
Updated
Dec 16, 2020 - JavaScript
-
Updated
Jul 9, 2020 - Swift
-
Updated
Nov 22, 2020 - Go
The generated client is built to work with specific version. It is fine to keep it open which versions are used in the end. But it would be much more useful to specify some versions at least as an example in the documentation here: https://guardrail.dev/scala/dropwizard/
Otherwise you leave it as an open quest for each and every developer trying to integrate it, and go through the hassle of fig
-
Updated
Dec 4, 2019 - C++
-
Updated
Dec 7, 2020 - Swift
-
Updated
Oct 5, 2020 - Kotlin
-
Updated
Nov 17, 2020 - Go
The Generated Client API is remains largely undocumented...
It would also be awesome if we could include the documentation of the API in the Generated DSL
-
Updated
Dec 10, 2020 - Rust
As noted in #122, setting up AppSync debugging in a Carthage-based project is challenging. We need to provide some developer documentation around that workflow to make it easier for developers to debug AppSync if they suspect a problem with the SDK.
See the documentation of the config file format.
The current state of existing configs (click to expand).
-
Updated
Dec 15, 2020 - JavaScript
Improve this page
Add a description, image, and links to the codegen topic page so that developers can more easily learn about it.
Add this topic to your repo
To associate your repository with the codegen topic, visit your repo's landing page and select "manage topics."
Is it possible to specify a complexity limit that doesn't apply to schema introspection? Or to manually set the complexity cost for schema introspection?
I took a look through the generated code, but didn't see any hooks relating to this (I may very well have missed it).