Fix issue #537 - Step 2 - Add support Extended Record Function + Attribute from support used current record definitions

[DocSvartz]

Fix Issue:
#501 - test named OnlyInlineRecordWorked (regarding not filling the record with data in the given case)

Add

1. (InlineExpression is Worked) Field Activation passing Field values not specified in the constructor when creating a new record instance
2. Record Creation on Default Passing Field values not specified in the constructor when creating a new record instance (Activation)
3. A special attribute to support custom classes (structures) that use the current record definition. description of spec record at the end of the page -
   [AdaptWith(AdaptDirectives.DestinationAsRecord)] - to be confirmed

Example:

 [TestMethod]
public void MultiCtorAndInlineRecordWorked()
{
var _sourcePoco = new MultiCtorAndInlinePoco() { MyInt = 1, MyString = "Hello", MyEmail = "123@gmail.com", InitData="Test"};
var _sourceMultiCtorAndInline = new MultiCtorAndInlineRecord(2, "Hello World") { InitData = "Worked", MyEmail = "243@gmail.com" };
var _resultMultiCtorAndInline = _sourcePoco.Adapt<MultiCtorAndInlineRecord>(); // Activation var _updateResult = _sourceMultiCtorAndInline.Adapt(_resultMultiCtorAndInline); // Update
_resultMultiCtorAndInline.MyInt.ShouldBe(1);
_resultMultiCtorAndInline.MyString.ShouldBe("Hello");
_resultMultiCtorAndInline.MyEmail.ShouldBe("123@gmail.com");
_resultMultiCtorAndInline.InitData.ShouldBe("Test");
_updateResult.MyInt.ShouldBe(2);
_updateResult.MyString.ShouldBe("Hello World");
_updateResult.MyEmail.ShouldBe("243@gmail.com");
_updateResult.InitData.ShouldBe("Worked");
}
record MultiCtorAndInlineRecord
{
public MultiCtorAndInlineRecord(int myInt)
{
MyInt = myInt;
}
public MultiCtorAndInlineRecord(int myInt, string myString) : this(myInt) // default have been using this constructor
{
MyString = myString;
}
public int MyInt { get; private set; } // private set only constructor or using init public string MyString { get; private set; } // private set only constructor or using init public string MyEmail { get; set; } public string InitData { get; init; } // init in Constructor or inline activation
}

[DocSvartz]

Explanations regarding tests marked Ignore
I don’t understand what exactly wanted to check in them?

1. If it is possible to map non-public fields to the record constructor, then the Source should have had them
2. If mapping fields from the Source to hidden fields in the record, then this should not work at all. The record is always activated through the constructor and they would have gotten there anyway. Because the sources are public.

Tests have been rewritten to test what the test name states

[andrerav]

Closed and reopened to re-run the workflow.

[andrerav]

Thank you @DocSvartz!