New `Query` classes

[distantnative]

This PR …

Features

• New Kirby\Query namespace with new Kirby\Query\Query class (to be used going forward for queries)
• New default entries/functions for queries
  • kirby, collection("your-collection"), page("blog"), file("blog/test.pdf"), site, user("homer"), t("your.i18n.key") https://github.com/getkirby/backlog/issues/81
• Support for closures as query arguments: site.myLazyFunction(() => site.children) - no support for parameters or others, only as lazy-calling measure

Deprecated

• Old Kirby\Toolkit\Query has been deprecated and will be removed in Kirby 3.9.0. Use Kirby\Query\Query instead, e.g.Query::factory($query)->resolve($data).
• new Query($query, $data): Passing $data to constructor will be deprecated in a future version. Use (new Query($query))->resolve($data) instead.
• Query::result() will be deprecated in a future version. Use $query->resolve($data) instead.

Ready?

• [x] Unit tests for fixed bug/feature
• [x] In-code documentation (wherever needed)
• [x] Tests and checks all pass

For review team

• [ ] Add changes to release notes draft in Notion
• [ ] Add to website docs release checklist (if needed)

[distantnative]

Tweaked the PR, so we should be able to add it in 3.8.x without breaking changes.

[distantnative]

Changed it to keep Toolkit\Query around as deprecated. That way we have no breaking change.

[lukasbestle]

Since this is quite a massive change, I feel like we should move this to 3.8.2 to reduce the risk of regressions in 3.8.1 (which is supposed to fix regressions and bugs from 3.8.0).

[bastianallgeier]

The classes and tests look really good. Is there anything in particular that we can do to test it some more? Are there any parts that you are not 100% sure about?

[distantnative]

I think I reimplemented all unit tests of the previous class.

I wasn't 100% sure where to put the inception possibility. But since the Query class would be the most likely one to extend, e.g. for KQL, I built it so that a class method in there gets called.

Also maybe to think about whether we want to have those standard entries/functions (for page, file...) in there.

[bastianallgeier]

I think it would be super nice to add page and file to entries. It is really making query strings a lot easier.

[bastianallgeier]

I would suggest to merge it like it is and then work on enhancements later if we need to.

[distantnative]

The entries are already in place 👍

But agreed, happy to merge it.