On typekits usage

[dvv]

Hello!

Say we have:

// import "./lib.js" // custom decorators here

namespace World;

scalar Id extends string;

model Bag<T extends Model> {
  storage: T[],
}

model Foo {
  id: Id,
}

// here an application of @deco goes

and lib.js is

export function $deco(context, model) {
  const tk = $(context.program)

  tk.entity.resolve("Id") // not found
  tk.entity.resolve("World.Id") // found, but how do I guess of the namespace name inside the decorator?

  tk.entity.resolve("Bag") // not enough template args, right
  tk.entity.resolve("Bag<Foo>") // not found
  tk.entity.resolve("World.Bag<World.Foo>") // not found
}

What should I do to make "resolve"s work?
Is there any way to specify default namespace for resolvers?

TIA

[timotheeguerin]

hhm yeah I don't think we have a way right now to resolve a template instance or declaration. How were you looking to use that?

[dvv]

I've been searching for a way to derive complex filters from a model.
Say,

union Filter<K, V> {
  { field: K, `op`: "eq", value: V },
  { field: K, `op`: "ne", value: V },
  { field: K, `op`: "in", value: V[] },
  // ...
}

scalar Id extends string;

model Foo {
  id: Id,
  name: string,
  // ...
}

@filtersOf(Read<Foo>)
union FooQuery {
  // the decorator should fill this with
  // filters for id
  { field: "id", `op`: "eq", value: Id },
  { field: "id", `op`: "ne", value: Id },
  { field: "id", `op`: "in", value: Id[] },
  // filters for name
  { field: "name", `op`: "eq", value: string },
  { field: "name", `op`: "ne", value: string },
  { field: "name", `op`: "in", value: string[] },
  // ...
}

So I see the $filtersOf shall iterate over provided Model props and replace their type with result of

tk.entity.resolve(`Filter<"${prop.name}", ${prop.type.name}>`)

(or circa).

[timotheeguerin]

we discussed on this issue the idea of exposing a instantiate typekit which I feel is exactly what you are looking for #7469 but this isn't something we provide at this moment. If it is I can split that of from this issue into a new one

[dvv]

Right, instantiate would be that, I believe.

What about the need to specify fully-qualified names for "resolve"s?

[timotheeguerin]

yeah I think that will still be needed, don't see how else it can resolve the right type otherwise

[dvv]

I thought $(context.program) somehow can be given the current namespace name. We do know at what place the decorator is called (via the node info?), don't we?