Generate typed PocketBase type

[scriptcoded]

In the latest release of the PocketBase JavaScript SDK there was added support for providing a typed instance of the client using type assertion. This PR adds a new exported type that fits this shape and can be used directly with PocketBase like this:

import { TypedPocketBase } from "./pocketbase-types";

const pb = new PocketBase('...') as TypedPocketBase

To make this work I had to add an import statement to the generated file to get the base types from PocketBase. The resulting file looks something like this:

/**
* This file was @generated using pocketbase-typegen
*/

import PocketBase, { RecordService } from 'pocketbase'

// ...

// Type for usage with type asserted Pocketbase instance
// https://github.com/pocketbase/js-sdk#specify-typescript-definitions

export type TypedPocketBase = PocketBase & {
	collection(idOrName: string): RecordService
	collection(idOrName: 'posts'): RecordService<PostsResponse>
	collection(idOrName: 'users'): RecordService<UsersResponse>
}

An alternative if you don't like having this import would be to use generics and have the user pass down the PocketBase and RecordService types, but I think the user experience would be a lot worse.

Closes #81

[patmood]

I love this, thanks for the contribution. Really glad pocketbase added this and I think it'll make this library much easier to use going forward.

I think there should be a --no-sdk command line option for users that just want pure types (maybe they are using the REST api).

Before merging I want to test it out and check some edge cases

[patmood]

Im not sure how expanded relation types and the generic fields for JSON objects will work with this setup. That's not a blocker though

[scriptcoded]

I think there should be a --no-sdk command line option for users that just want pure types (maybe they are using the REST api).

I agree this would be a good addition. I'll make sure to add it. I also realize I completely forget to update the documentation so I'll make sure that gets added as well.

As for expanded relations I totally didn't think of that so I'll have to read up on exactly how the types behave in that case before I give my thoughts 😄 In the worst case you should still be able to pass generic types to the collection methods (like .getOne) even though you're using the typed SDK.

[patmood]

Thanks for doing this! I'm traveling at the moment so I appreciate the update for the new SDK. Could you also bump the version in package.json to 1.1.14?

[scriptcoded]

@patmood I don't know what versioning strategy you're using, but seeing as this adds additional functionality, should this maybe me a minor bump i.e. 1.2.0?

[patmood]

Thanks again @scriptcoded - Looks good! 🎉 I'll update to 1.2.0 before I release

[anbraten]

Just noticed this one when updating to the latest release. It's such a useful nifty feature Thanks ❤️