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

Client Codegen doesn't handle the name properly with play projects. #950

Closed
paulpdaniels opened this issue Jul 6, 2021 · 1 comment · Fixed by #956
Closed

Client Codegen doesn't handle the name properly with play projects. #950

paulpdaniels opened this issue Jul 6, 2021 · 1 comment · Fixed by #956
Labels
enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers tools Issue related to Caliban tools like code generation or schema comparison

Comments

@paulpdaniels
Copy link
Collaborator

Currently the client codegen uses a regex based system to extract the name of the client from the file name (or falls back to Client if it can't find it). The regex however relies on the presence of /scala in the path name which breaks with play (and any custom directory structures).

Work around is to make your client projects part of a separate module if using play (one that follows the correct directory structure). But given that play is pretty widely used it seems like we could support it out of the box since it is just about adding a |play to the regex.

Issue illustrated here: https://scastie.scala-lang.org/ucJFJg63QHqsgHHDl7AibQ

@ghostdogpr
Copy link
Owner

Sure, let's add |play 👍

@ghostdogpr ghostdogpr added enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers tools Issue related to Caliban tools like code generation or schema comparison labels Jul 6, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers tools Issue related to Caliban tools like code generation or schema comparison
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants