feat: adding interpreter options override

[artur-ciocanu]

Description
This is an enhancement that would allow anyone to override default interpreter behavior. Some of use cases are overriding default behavior of additionalProperties, additionalItems that would allow anyone to customize how these schema properties are handled. For example by default these properties are treated as true, however we might want to treat them as false during code gen.

A typical example using interpreter options would look like this:

const generator = new JavaGenerator({
  processorOptions: {
    interpreter: {
      allOf: (schema, model, interpreter, interpreterOptions) => {
        // some custom logic for interpreting "allOf"
      }
    }
  }
});

Related issue(s)
#916

[artur-ciocanu]

@jonaslagoni this one is back 😄 . Could you please take a look. Thank you.

[jonaslagoni]

@artur-ciocanu nice!

We do need some extra changes though, cause without them, the users won't the feature is there! So we need to make the documentation reflect the use-case and then provide an example where you show how it can be done 🙂

[200Puls]

This is really super useful.
We were debating on creating something similar for our usecase (turning additionalProperties to false)

[artur-ciocanu]

@artur-ciocanu nice!

We do need some extra changes though, cause without them, the users won't the feature is there! So we need to make the documentation reflect the use-case and then provide an example where you show how it can be done 🙂

@jonaslagoni I am still new to this, so could you please let me know where should I add the examples and the docs?

[jonaslagoni]

@artur-ciocanu you can find out how to create new examples here: https://github.com/asyncapi/modelina/blob/next/docs/contributing.md#adding-examples

For the docs it's slightly trickier, I think we need a section here: https://github.com/asyncapi/modelina/blob/next/docs/advanced.md

It should explain the use-case of when you would want to use this feature of overwriting the interpreters as well as a link to the example you created 🙂

[artur-ciocanu]

@jonaslagoni I have added an example and a new section to docs. Let me know if it is looking good. Also should I rebase from master?

[jonaslagoni]

Something I have been wondering, cant recall if we already discussed this, but if it's really only about turning interpretation on or off for additionalProperties and additionalItems, we could just add the options ignoreAdditionalProperties and ignoreAdditionalItems instead of allowing changing the entire interpretation callbacks.

It would be both easier for the end-user and easier to implement.

But if the use-case is really to allow custom interpretations, that can't be solved by simple boolean options, then I am all aboard this feature. Just need to be for the right reasons 😄

[jonaslagoni]

Also should I rebase from master?

I actually cant recall what needs to change once we merge #674, so lets see 🙂

[artur-ciocanu]

Something I have been wondering, cant recall if we already discussed this, but if it's really only about turning interpretation on or off for additionalProperties and additionalItems, we could just add the options ignoreAdditionalProperties and ignoreAdditionalItems instead of allowing changing the entire interpretation callbacks.

It would be both easier for the end-user and easier to implement.

But if the use-case is really to allow custom interpretations, that can't be solved by simple boolean options, then I am all aboard this feature. Just need to be for the right reasons 😄

@jonaslagoni now that you mentioned it, I do think that in some cases we might want to have the full power of interpreter options overwrite. However I would go with simple booleans for addtionalProperties and additionaltems for now and later we can add other options in the form of function overrides.

I will adjust the PR, so it is smaller in scope and I'll adjust the examples and docs.

Thanks a lot for a great suggestion!

[jonaslagoni]

Sounds good @artur-ciocanu 👍 Also feel free to re-target the PR to the master branch 🙂 I don't think you will encounter any problems, but lets see.

[sonarcloud]

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
0.0% Duplication

[artur-ciocanu]

Closing this one in favor of #1094.

@jonaslagoni unfortunately there were too many conflicts.

[artur-ciocanu]

This is really super useful. We were debating on creating something similar for our usecase (turning additionalProperties to false)

@200Puls I have opened another #1094, please take a look. I have to close this one since next branch has been merged to master.