Abstract ObjectType is allowed in Schema

[twavv]

I have code that looks approximately like this.

@InterfaceType("Animal")
abstract class AnimalGQLInterface {
    @Field(() => String)
    abstract name: Promise<string>;
}

@ObjectType("AnimalBase", {
  isAbstract: true,
  implements: [AnimalGQLInterface],
})
abstract class Animal implements AnimalGQLInterface {
  abstract readonly id: string;

  async get name() {
    return nameService.getAnimalName(this.id);
  }
}

@ObjectType()
class Cat extends Animal {
  /* ... */
}

@ObjectType()
class Dog extends Animal {
  /* ... */
}

In other places, I accidentally wrote this:

// Incorrect: uses Animal instead of AnimalGQLInterface for decorator
@Field(() => [Animal])
pets: Animal[];

The correct code there was

@Field(() => [AnimalGQLInterface])
pets: Animal[];

Despite the fact that isAbstract: true was set on Animal, the resulting GraphQL schema includes AnimalBase as a type.

What should it do?

It should throw an error that abstract type made it into the GraphQL schema.

[MichalLytek]

Despite the fact that isAbstract: true was set on Animal, the resulting GraphQL schema includes AnimalBase as a type

isAbstract is only used to prevent auto-registering in schema. When you use it directly, it assumes you know what you're doing 😄

It should throw an error that abstract type made it into the GraphQL schema.

I think you're right 😉 Added to #12 🔒

[twavv]

My ultimate solution to this was to just remove the @ObjectType decorator on the base class (the main benefit of it was just the automatic implements which I can just manually add).