Add arguments to ConstructorMetadataAnnotation

[scheglov]

An oversight? A feature?
@jakemac53

[jakemac53]

Just not added yet :).

It should be a Code object.

[davidmorgan]

@jakemac53 hmm, looking at the existing Code types, I'm not seeing exactly what I need, here is my first guess for expanding them ... what do you think please? :)

New type InvocationCode would look a bit like existing FunctionTypeAnnotationCode, with List<ArgumentCode> namedArguments and List<ArgumentCode> positionalArguments.

Then new type ArgumentCode would look a bit like existing ParameterCode but with just String? name and ExpressionCode argument .

Then ConstructorMetadataAnnotation gains new required field InvocationCode arguments.

Thanks :)

[jakemac53]

What I was thinking was more along the lines of just adding Map<String, ExpressionCode> namedArguments and List<ExpressionCode> positionalArguments as fields directly to ConstructorMetadataAnnotation. Although we could add a new class to encapsulate those, it wouldn't implement Code.

Basically, the goal is to allow you to be able to get the individual values of the arguments, but not the full code for how the argument was passed (or at least, I don't think that is necessary). The goal really is just to expose enough information such that you could write a MyMetadata.fromAnnotation(ConstructorMetadataAnnotation annotation) constructor.

[davidmorgan]

SGTM, thanks.