Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
A handful of users have had complaints of builders not being directly compatible with djs methods. This is because this library uses api-types which is expected and somewhat intended.
Describe the ideal solution
Instead I'm proposing we introduce Builder#toData. This is basically just like toJSON but instead gives you the djs *Data equivalent type. This allows the builders to be used with djs, and not require any implementation changes in djs.
Describe alternatives you've considered
Some of have brought up the solution of allowing djs methods to accept both api-types and djs data. However as others have stated this seems out of place for the djs library.
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. A handful of users have had complaints of builders not being directly compatible with djs methods. This is because this library uses api-types which is expected and somewhat intended.
Describe the ideal solution
Instead I'm proposing we introduce
Builder#toData. This is basically just liketoJSONbut instead gives you the djs*Dataequivalent type. This allows the builders to be used with djs, and not require any implementation changes in djs.Describe alternatives you've considered
Some of have brought up the solution of allowing djs methods to accept both api-types and djs data. However as others have stated this seems out of place for the djs library.
Refs: #37 #32 Willing to submit PR