feat: improve parsing

[tenstad]

Simplifies a lot of the complexity of having separate processType, loadType and loadAliasType.

Removes ArrayKind, as it is not supported by controller-gen.

Also ensures correct parsing of A in the example below, making A.UnderlyingType equal B instead of string. This will be required to correctly parse and propagate markers (#49).

type Foo struct {
	A A `json:"a,omitempty"`
}

type A B
type B string

[thbkrkr]

This is very nice!

Also ensures correct parsing of A in the example below, making A.UnderlyingType equal B instead of string. This will be required to correctly parse and propagate markers (#49).

Could you update test/api/v1/guestbook_types.go with an example that covers this?

Suggestion but feel free to rename:

// UnderlyingType tests that A.UnderlyingType equals B instead of string.
// +kubebuilder:object:root=true
type UnderlyingType struct {
	A A `json:"a,omitempty"`
}

type A B
type B string

I think we need to adapt RenderTypeLink a bit in both renderers because we can now have a link in a title which isn't rendered as expected.

[tenstad]

Added the test in two commits, where the 2nd (319af4e) shows the changes introduced by this PR.

[tenstad]

Wondering if we should update the rendering so that the test types we added renders as they used to 🤔

[tenstad]

Having different descriptions, I guess it is nice to show both Underlying1 and Underlying2 :)

[thbkrkr]

Last changes are 👍 👍 .

I think that the last bits to fix are for the rendering.

In asciidoc, it looks like xref doesn't work well when used in a title. See the example below where the cross reference for Underlying2 doesn't work:

The only idea I have for now is to use link:#, which seems a bit hacky?

For markdown, we need to add the backquotes conditionally otherwise the link is not rendered:

[tenstad]

What if we display Underlying type: in both adoc and markdown. And show the type as in a struct field?

[thbkrkr]

LGTM!

We really appreciate your contribution, thanks again.