You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Throughout the GraphQL schema, fields populated by an Address have been
given the type Account, which enabled nested queries on that address. Take,
for example, a lookup table account.
You can see fields like ownerProgram and authority are queryable as Account types, allowing full account queries to be performed on these nested
fields.
We can enable the same types of nested queries for block on any fields that are
populated with Slot.
Details
This is actually quite trivial to implement, given the relationship of type definitions
and resolvers defined in this library. Here's an example.
Motivation
Throughout the GraphQL schema, fields populated by an
Address
have beengiven the type
Account
, which enabled nested queries on that address. Take,for example, a lookup table account.
You can see fields like
ownerProgram
andauthority
are queryable asAccount
types, allowing fullaccount
queries to be performed on these nestedfields.
We can enable the same types of nested queries for
block
on any fields that arepopulated with
Slot
.Details
This is actually quite trivial to implement, given the relationship of type definitions
and resolvers defined in this library. Here's an example.
The main question here is "should we do this?" and unless we can produce
salient arguments against it, I believe we should.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: