feat: introduce ordered maps into libopenapi

[TristanSpeakEasy]

Picks up from #138 and tries to address #119

The main goals will be:

• Support iterating through the high model in the same order as the OpenAPI document
• Render documents out deterministically
• Render documents out matching the original order (if just making light modifications to the document)
• Control the order of the rendered out docs, for example when the order of path items or components are specifically reordered
• Any maps stored within example or examples fields in schemas can maintain order both on read/write

Done:

• Replace all instances of native map usage
• Improve usage of orderedmap to avoid panics
• Validate some of the changes to tests
• Test new items can be added to docs in expected order
• Test existing items in docs can be reordered
• Improve API for dealing with untyped example/examples fields in schemas

[daveshanley]

Let me know when you're ready for me to review.

[TristanSpeakEasy]

It is ready to review now we have had it in production for the last couple of days and no issues yet

…

On Tue, 12 Dec 2023 at 18:36, quobix ***@***.***> wrote: Let me know when you're ready for me to review. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#205 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AZYQK2GLFN3KXSJXEEIZCO3YJCPZFAVCNFSM6AAAAAA74L3OGSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTQNJSGU4TSNRWG4> . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[daveshanley]

I am working my way through it, should be done tomorrow.

[daveshanley]

Wow, what a PR! Such a huge lift to turn this around, but provides a real maturity to the library, allowing us to march forward with other higher level features, knowing the lower levels are now solid.

[daveshanley]

In regards to coverage, I would really appreciate bringing it up to 99.6 at a minimum. I don't want to lose the 100% badge we have on the readme, and it rounds up to keep things clean :)

[TristanSpeakEasy]

In regards to coverage, I would really appreciate bringing it up to 99.6 at a minimum. I don't want to lose the 100% badge we have on the readme, and it rounds up to keep things clean :)

I'll try and achieve this, some of the uncovered lines were a bit hard to determine the best way to test but I'll try a few techniques and then reach out for help if needed

[TristanSpeakEasy]

In regards to coverage, I would really appreciate bringing it up to 99.6 at a minimum. I don't want to lose the 100% badge we have on the readme, and it rounds up to keep things clean :)

Okay coverage seems to be at 99.60% now so hopefully good to go? @daveshanley

[TristanSpeakEasy]

I have pull requests ready to go in libopenapi-validator and vacuum once this merges and I can update those dependencies

[daveshanley]

Looks good, I think you need to rebase however, there are conflicts.