feat: user models

[anand2312]

This pull request makes APIResponse, and the request builders' .execute methods generic, to allow users to pass their own pydantic BaseModels to use as response models.
Example:

from datetime import datetime
from typing import Optional, List

from postgrest_py import SyncPostgrestClient as Client
from pydantic import BaseModel

client = SyncPostgrestClient(...)

class City(BaseModel):
    id: Optional[int]
    created_at: Optional[datetime]
    country_id: Optional[int]
    city_name: Optional[str]


class Country(BaseModel):
    id: Optional[int]
    created_at: Optional[datetime]
    country_name: Optional[str]
    capital: Optional[str]
    cities: Optional[List[City]]

r = client.from_("countries").select("*,cities(*)").execute()
reveal_type(r.data)  # Type is List[Dict[str, Any]]

r = client.from_("countries").select("*,cities(*)").execute(model=Country)
reveal_type(r.data)  # Type is List[Country]

[sourcery-ai]

Sourcery Code Quality Report

❌  Merging this PR will decrease code quality in the affected files by 0.29%.

Quality metrics	Before	After	Change
Complexity	0.63 ⭐	0.63 ⭐	0.00
Method Length	26.22 ⭐	26.88 ⭐	0.66 👎
Working memory	5.88 ⭐	5.98 ⭐	0.10 👎
Quality	88.61% ⭐	88.32% ⭐	-0.29% 👎

Other metrics	Before	After	Change
Lines	460	483	23

Changed files	Quality Before	Quality After	Quality Change
postgrest_py/base_request_builder.py	88.74% ⭐	88.81% ⭐	0.07% 👍
postgrest_py/_async/request_builder.py	88.32% ⭐	87.26% ⭐	-1.06% 👎
postgrest_py/_sync/request_builder.py	88.35% ⭐	87.29% ⭐	-1.06% 👎

Here are some functions in these files that still need a tune-up:

File	Function	Complexity	Length	Working Memory	Quality	Recommendation

Legend and Explanation

The emojis denote the absolute quality of the code:

• ⭐ excellent
• 🙂 good
• 😞 poor
• ⛔ very poor

The 👍 and 👎 indicate whether the quality has improved or gotten worse with this pull request.

---

Please see our documentation here for details on how these metrics are calculated.

We are actively working on this report - lots more documentation and extra metrics to come!

Help us improve this quality report!

[anand2312]

@leynier @J0 @dreinon marking this PR as draft to finetune some stuff, can you look through the basic implementation in the meantime to see if there are any obvious flaws? Thanks 😄

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #86 (434e57f) into master (34fd1bd) will decrease coverage by 0.05%.
The diff coverage is 87.50%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #86      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   90.08%   90.02%   -0.06%     
==========================================
  Files          22       22              
  Lines         867      872       +5     
==========================================
+ Hits          781      785       +4     
- Misses         86       87       +1     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
postgrest_py/_async/request_builder.py	89.36% <80.00%> (+0.23%)	⬆️
postgrest_py/_sync/request_builder.py	89.36% <80.00%> (+0.47%)	⬆️
postgrest_py/base_request_builder.py	75.73% <100.00%> (-0.31%)	⬇️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 34fd1bd...434e57f. Read the comment docs.

[anand2312]

Will write an updated implementation