The expansion of the auth directive function is employed, whereby each procurement of authorization is identical

[cheft]

Describe the bug

the expansion of the auth directive function is employed, whereby each procurement of authorization is identical, as though it has been cached.

import { getDirective, MapperKind, mapSchema } from '@graphql-tools/utils'

export default function authDirective() {
  return {
    authDirectiveTypeDefs: 'directive @auth(role: String) on FIELD_DEFINITION',
    authDirectiveTransformer: (schema) => mapSchema(schema, {
      [MapperKind.OBJECT_FIELD](fieldConfig) {
        const directive = getDirective(schema, fieldConfig, 'auth')?.[0]
        if (directive) {
          const { resolve } = fieldConfig
          fieldConfig.resolve = async (source, args, ctx, info) => {
            try {
              let token = ctx.request.headers.get('authorization') || ''
              console.log('111', ctx.request.headers)
              return resolve(source, args, ctx, info)
            } catch (e) {
              ctx.log.info(e)
            }
          }
          return fieldConfig
        }
      },
    }),
  }
}

Your Example Website or App

https://stackoverflow.com/help/mcve

Steps to Reproduce the Bug or Issue

In graphql-yoga version 5.1.0, utilizing graphql-tools/utils version 10.0.11, the expansion of the auth directive function is employed, whereby each procurement of authorization is identical, as though it has been cached. Reverting yoga to version 4.0.0 restores normalcy.

Expected behavior

Aspiring for functionality within graphql-yoga version 5.1.0.

Screenshots or Videos

No response

Platform

• OS: [macOS]
• NodeJS: v18.18.0
• graphql-yoga 5.1.0
• @graphql-tools/utils 10.0.11

Additional context

No response

[EmrysMyrddin]

Hi @judastheo and thank you for the report!

Sorry but I'm not adding a lot here but just labeling it according to our new Contribution Guide and issue flow.

One way of pushing this forward would be to provide a reproduction example, for example on Stackblitz or Codepen.
Maybe even adding a failing test so we could get this into stage 2!

Thank you and sorry that this comment is not a complete solution (yet).