Add custom fields to DTO
See original GitHub issueIs your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. The possibility to add additional property fields to the generated DTO classes which can be used internally by resolvers. These properties should be not available through the GraphQL API.
Describe the solution you’d like An additional setting to specify the properties which are appended to the DTO and the types e.g.
customMappings = [
"User.internalDate": "java.util.Date"
]
Describe alternatives you’ve considered I searched the current configuration options, but did not find that capability. Is is supported in some way?
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 3 years ago
- Comments:11 (3 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Which is better adding new fields to existing DTO class or new ...
I would rather consider best design practice that will allow you to maintain your application should you need to add/edit fields in the...
Read more >Automatically Mapping DTO to Entity on Spring Boot APIs
Let's learn how ModelMapper can help us automate the mapping process of DTOs into entities on Spring Boot APIs.
Read more >One-Stop Guide to Mapping with MapStruct - Reflectoring
Thus client applications can accept a data object in a custom-defined DTO with required fields. Still, the DTO pattern heavily depends on ...
Read more >Data Transfer Object (DTO) - Oat++
It is a special object which can be Serialized and Deserialized with the help of oatpp::data::mapping::ObjectMapper. Declaration. Field Name Qualifier; Default ...
Read more >Why, When and How to Use DTO Projections with JPA and ...
After you defined your DTO class, you can use it as a projection with JPQL, criteria and native queries. For each kind of...
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
Thanks, this is working!
I did not consider to separate the generation process and the API provisioning process. It looks a little bit odd to have private API definitions just for the generation process, but it is doing its job.
Glad it worked!