add support for map nested in struct

[lvandenbrink]

Mappings nested in structs are not generated with additional properties. If a field is of a MapType, add the field with additional properties. If needed add the key and value type to the scheme.

Relation issue
#517

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #521 into master will increase coverage by 0.06%.
The diff coverage is 84.61%.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master    #521      +/-   ##
=========================================
+ Coverage   87.24%   87.3%   +0.06%     
=========================================
  Files           7       7              
  Lines        1560    1599      +39     
=========================================
+ Hits         1361    1396      +35     
- Misses        117     119       +2     
- Partials       82      84       +2

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
parser.go	82.35% <84.61%> (+0.32%)	⬆️

---

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 b564023...07be9c2. Read the comment docs.

[easonlin404]

can you help add tests for it?

[lvandenbrink]

I added a FooBarMap struct to the api in composition test. With view-covered I see that the tests the covers the added code. Except for when the map is required or the parsing of the value fails.

If that doesn't suffice, can you indicate which part should further tested and where to add it?

[ubogdan]

Please see dictionaries spec, The actual code inserts a definition to the object "api.MapValue" that is not referenced anywhere.

[ubogdan]

Definition

type FooBarMap struct {
	Field3 map[string]MapValue
}

type MapValue struct {
	Field4 string
}

should produce

api.FooBarMap:
    type: object
    properties:
      field3:
        type: object
        additionalProperties:
          $ref: '#/definitions/api.MapValue'

  api.MapValue:
    type: object
    properties:
      field4:
        type: string

[lvandenbrink]

That would be indeed a better approach. Although I see if there is a map in operations it doesn't use the reference, but also inlines the value.

So to do this. the scheme of the additionalProperties needs to be something like:

mapValueScheme :=  &spec.Schema{
	SchemaProps: spec.SchemaProps{
		Ref: spec.Ref{
			Ref: jsonreference.MustCreateRef("#/definitions/" + pkgName + "." + ???),
		},
	},
}

But I have some questions about how to get the ???.

With itemSchema, err := parser.parseTypeExpr(pkgName, "", astTypeMap.Value) the MapValue is parsed and added to the definitions. The name api.MapValue is refTypeName := fullTypeName(pkgName, expr.Name) in the case that astTypeMap.Value is of type *ast.Ident. Although I don't see a clear way to get the name api.MapValue from either itemSchema or astTypeMap.Value. Is there are already a function that returns "api.MapValue"?

I case no, what would be the best solution?

1. Write a function that returns api.MapValue given astTypeMap?
2. Or let parser.parseTypeExpr also return the definition key (api.MapValue)?

[ubogdan]

This will register your api.MapValue to definitions

		itemSchema, err := parser.parseTypeExpr(pkgName, "", astTypeMap.Value)
		if err != nil {
			return properties, nil, err
		}

Neighter of 2 solutions.

You need to use the astTypeMap.Value to add it to object..

fullTypeName, err := getFieldType(astTypeMap.Value)
if err != nil {
	return ....
}
mapValueScheme :=  &spec.Schema{
	SchemaProps: spec.SchemaProps{
		Ref: spec.Ref{
			Ref: jsonreference.MustCreateRef("#/definitions/" + fullTypeName),
		},
	},
}

I'm quite busy these days and I don't have much time to spend here. I hope i was clear enough with the last response.

[lvandenbrink]

You made it clear. Almost did it yourself ><

[ubogdan]

LGTM