Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Refactor jit plugin #1376

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Refactor jit plugin #1376

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

kamilkisiela
Copy link
Collaborator

🚨 IMPORTANT: Please do not create a Pull Request without creating an issue first.

Any change needs to be discussed before proceeding. Failure to do so may result in the rejection of the pull request.

Description

Please include a summary of the change and which issue is fixed. Please also include relevant motivation and context. List any dependencies that are required for this change.

Fixes # (issue)

Type of change

Please delete options that are not relevant.

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • This change requires a documentation update

Screenshots/Sandbox (if appropriate/relevant):

Adding links to sandbox or providing screenshots can help us understand more about this PR and take action on it as appropriate

How Has This Been Tested?

Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Provide instructions so we can reproduce. Please also list any relevant details for your test configuration

  • Test A
  • Test B

Test Environment:

  • OS:
  • @envelop/...:
  • NodeJS:

Checklist:

  • I have followed the CONTRIBUTING doc and the style guidelines of this project
  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have commented on my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • My changes generate no new warnings
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
  • Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules

Further comments

If this is a relatively large or complex change, kick off the discussion by explaining why you chose the solution you did and what alternatives you considered, etc...

@changeset-bot
Copy link

changeset-bot bot commented Apr 20, 2022

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: c2e01c5

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

@vercel
Copy link

vercel bot commented Apr 20, 2022

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Updated
envelop ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview May 17, 2022 at 5:28PM (UTC)

@theguild-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

theguild-bot commented Apr 20, 2022

The latest changes of this PR are not available as alpha, since there are no linked changesets for this PR.

@saihaj
Copy link
Collaborator

saihaj commented Apr 25, 2022

@kamilkisiela try rebasing with main and should fix K6

Comment on lines 75 to 79
function jitExecute(args: ExecutionArgs) {
const cacheEntry = getCacheEntry(args);

return cacheEntry.query(args.rootValue, args.contextValue, args.variableValues);
}
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Once I use makeExecute to make args always an object (to make it v15,v16 compat), it adds an anonymous function on top of the original one which breaks the tests.
@saihaj

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I thought to not do makeExecuteFn but take the private getExecuteArgs function. This way we don't recreate a function over and over again.

@n1ru4l
Copy link
Owner

n1ru4l commented Jul 11, 2022

@kamilkisiela Do you mind rebasing this and adding a PR description + changeset that describes the changes?

@kamilkisiela
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@n1ru4l not this week

@YassinEldeeb
Copy link
Collaborator

Hey @ardatan. this looks great. as @n1ru4l requested, can you please rebase this and add a PR description + changeset that describes the changes to merge this?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants