Add attribute to handle deserialization of constructor parameters with name overrides

[praneetloke]

This PR is in support of pulumi/pulumi#14130.

I have a local override for the native provider in question to use the changes in this PR, as well as codegen changes in pulumi/pulumi using the PR pulumi/pulumi#14246 with additional changes to emit the attribute introduced in this PR.

Here's how it looks in practice in a provider's SDK:

    [OutputType]
    public sealed class ListOneClicksProperties
    {
        public readonly ImmutableArray<Outputs.OneClicks> _1Clicks;

        [OutputConstructor]
        private ListOneClicksProperties([OutputConstructorParameterAttribute("1_clicks")] ImmutableArray<Outputs.OneClicks> _1Clicks)
        {
            this._1Clicks = _1Clicks;
        }
    }

[justinvp]

Thanks @praneetloke! Some comments.

Also, this needs tests. See

pulumi-dotnet/sdk/Pulumi.Tests/Serialization/ComplexTypeConverterTests.cs

Line 82 in 8f1dd5e

public async Task TestComplexType1()

Your usage in the PR description doesn't quite look how I'd expect it to. I'd expect something like:

    [OutputType]
    public sealed class ListOneClicksProperties
    {
        public readonly ImmutableArray<Outputs.OneClicks> _1Clicks;

        [OutputConstructor]
        private ListOneClicksProperties([OutputConstructorParameter("1_clicks")] ImmutableArray<Outputs.OneClicks> _1Clicks)
        {
            this._1Clicks = _1Clicks;
        }
    }

[justinvp]

The type should be sealed.

Also, I wonder if a better name would be OutputConstructorParameterAttribute, to align with OutputConstructorAttribute:

Suggested change

	public class ConstructorParameterNameOverrideAttribute : Attribute
	public sealed class OutputConstructorParameterAttribute : Attribute

I also wonder if this should be moved directly below OutputConstructorAttribute (line 76).

[praneetloke]

I've made changes for both suggestions you've made here. Also on the topic of the attribute class being sealed I noticed that ResourceTypeAttribute is not marked as such. That's the one I was using as reference and hence didn't mark the new one as sealed initially. Would you like me to mark it as sealed as well?

[praneetloke]

@justinvp I've pushed new commits with changes based on your feedback.

Your usage in the PR description doesn't quite look how I'd expect it to. I'd expect something like:

Ah, indeed. I made a mistake in the codegen and wrote out the attribute on the class member instead of the constructor param...despite the name of the attribute 🤦‍♂️ . I'll fix that when I open the PR in pulumi/pulumi though. I've noted it down.

[praneetloke]

Bump.

[justinvp]

LGTM! Thank you @praneetloke and apologies for the long delay getting this reviewed!

[praneetloke]

@justinvp awesome! The status checks for this PR still says that the workflow requires approval from a maintainer though and haven't run. Any idea why that might be?

[Frassle]

Looks like you just need to run "dotnet run format-sdk"

[praneetloke]

Ah got it. I'll remember that for next time. Thanks, @Frassle.