Javascript API types incorrect when reading physical size

[TomzBench]

When using the Tauri API in typescript, the intellisense is not correct, (and therefore the typescript declarations are wrong?) Specifically the API I notice this issue is when reading the physical size.

const size = await api.window.appWindow.innerSize(); // { height: yyy, width: xxx}
size.toLogical(...); // <--- [Error] toLogical does not exist on size

My guess is that when sending the rust props over to javascript, the prototypes or methods are lost and only the values are passed. However the typescript typings are assuming you have a constructed object.

[amrbashir]

toLogical doesn't communicate with rust at all, what is the type of size

[TomzBench]

toLogical doesn't communicate with rust at all, what is the type of size

The actual type returned by innerSize() is a plain object with keys height and width. However, typescript thinks the object returned from innerSize() is aPhysicalSize object which is a class with methods that has atoLogical method. So i think the mapping between Tauri backend and the javascript frontend types is off.

[amrbashir]

if typescript thinks the object is PhysicalSize and it has toLogical() method, then I see no problem as this is the intended behavior.

Tauri's backend and Rust has no role in this as toLogical() is purely executed in js only.

[FabianLars]

No, the problem is, the function is defined as async innerPosition(): Promise<PhysicalPosition>, but instead of an instance of the PhysicalSize class (window.ts#L116-130) it returns a plain {width: a, height: b}

[TomzBench]

if typescript thinks the object is PhysicalSize and it has toLogical() method, then I see no problem as this is the intended behavior.

Tauri's backend and Rust has no role in this as toLogical() is purely executed in js only.

The return type is wrong in the javascript function. You can either make the javascript create a new instance of a PhysicalSize and return this. Or change the return type.

[amrbashir]

Ah yes, I see the problem now, we are indeed just returning a plain object instead of an instance of a class.

Should've read your words more carefully, apologies.

[sirgallifrey]

If there isn't anyone already working on it, I'll give it a shot as my first contribution

[lemarier]

If there isn't anyone already working on it, I'll give it a shot as my first contribution

It's all yours! Do not hesitate if you have any questions! You can reach us on discord as well.