[Swift Codegen] Adding some explicit type annotations#1638
Conversation
|
@djs-code: Thank you for submitting a pull request! Before we can merge it, you'll need to sign the Apollo Contributor License Agreement here: https://contribute.apollographql.com/ |
94f19c3 to
02a6374
Compare
|
@djs-code out of curiosity, what's the compile time improvement you're seeing after adding explicit types? |
|
looks like something in here is failing the linter - @trevorblades or @abernix any rough clue what? |
|
@designatednerd The benchmarking wasn't too extensive, but the handful of files I tested the before/after of yielded a 12~15% improvement. |
|
That's not bad for just throwing in a few types. Let's see what the JS group have to say when they have a moment about the lint failures, I already kicked the build once and am seeing the same issues - you might be able to trigger the linter to auto-format by saving and running tests with |
|
Apparently: “Running Sent with GitHawk |
|
@designatednerd Looks like that did the trick! 🎉 |
|
...or did I speak too soon? 🤔 |
|
OK kicked the build - the thing that failed won't rerun until after all the other tests are done |
designatednerd
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good to merge whenever CI gets its shit together
|
Tooling team's on it - your code is fine. 😃 |
|
@designatednerd Heya, have we been able to nail down what's going awry here? |
|
@djs-code Can you try rebasing off |
Addiing explicit type annotations for `operationDefinition`, `operationName`, and `possibleTypes` to help out compile times.
2a39a87 to
1b04d48
Compare
|
@designatednerd Yup, looks like we're good to go. 👍 |
Adding explicit type annotations for
operationDefinition,operationName, andpossibleTypesto help out Swift compile times.TODO: