df_10_field_binders

field-specific dynamic binders example

this example demonstrates FieldDynamicBinders for per-field polymorphic type control, allowing different struct fields to use different sets of dynamic type mappings.

key concepts demonstrated

field-specific polymorphic binding

• FieldDynamicBinders: different type registries for different struct fields
• field path targeting: precise control over which fields use which binders
• override behavior: field-specific binders override global binders
• path matching: automatic handling of array indices in field paths

advanced dynamic typing

• heterogeneous polymorphism: different fields support different type sets
• context-aware binding: type resolution based on field location
• namespace isolation: prevent type conflicts between different domains
• extensible architecture: easy addition of new types per field

real-world scenarios

• workflow systems: steps and actions have different type sets
• plugin architectures: different extension points support different plugins
• configuration systems: different sections support different schema types
• content management: different content areas support different widget types

workflow demonstrated

1. field path definition: understand how field paths are constructed
2. binder registration: register different type sets for different fields
3. polymorphic binding: bind data with field-specific type resolution
4. type isolation: demonstrate how types are isolated per field
5. fallback behavior: show global binder fallback when field binders aren't found

example structure

the example demonstrates a workflow system with:

• workflow steps: process, decision, notification steps
• step actions: different action types per step type
• trigger conditions: different condition types for triggers
• data transformations: different transformer types for data processing

usage

go run main.go

benefits

• type safety: compile-time safety with field-specific runtime flexibility
• namespace isolation: prevent type name conflicts between different domains
• extensible design: easily add new types to specific fields without affecting others
• clean architecture: separate concerns by field rather than globally
• precise control: fine-grained control over polymorphic behavior