feat: add support for field metadata and list element annotations

[Swoorup]

…ArrowField

[gooroo-dev]

Please double check the following review of the pull request:

🐞Mistake	🤪Typo	🚨Security	🚀Performance	💪Best Practices	📖Readability	❓Others
0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Changes in the diff

• ➕ Added support for field metadata and list element annotations in Arrow fields.
• ➕ Introduced with_list_element_name, with_field_metadata, and with_list_element_metadata helper functions to modify Arrow Fields.
• ➕ Extended derive macro to parse and apply list_element_name, metadata, and list_element_metadata attributes at both container and field levels.
• ➕ Added precedence rules for list element naming and metadata (field-level overrides container-level).
• ➕ Added comprehensive tests verifying field renaming, list element naming overrides, and metadata support.
• 📖 Improved README with usage examples for new metadata and list element annotations.
• 🛠️ Refactored derive input parsing and field expansion to support new attributes.

Identified Issues

No significant issues found. The code is well structured, with clear attribute parsing, merging logic for metadata, and tests covering the new features.

Missing Tests

The diff already includes thorough tests for:

• Field name overrides with rename_all.
• Composition of rename_all with type overrides and skip.
• List element name container-level and field-level overrides.
• Metadata support for field and list element metadata with precedence.

No additional tests are necessary for the introduced features.

Summary

The PR cleanly adds support for field metadata and list element annotations with proper attribute parsing, merging logic, and tests. No mistakes, typos, or security issues found. The code is readable and follows best practices. The documentation is updated accordingly. This change is ready for merging.

Summon me to re-review when updated! Yours, Gooroo.dev
I'd appreciate it if you could react or reply!

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 92.95154% with 16 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 93.95%. Comparing base (6fd697c) to head (51bd911).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
arrow_convert_derive/src/input.rs	88.54%	15 Missing ⚠️
arrow_convert/src/field.rs	97.43%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #35      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   92.27%   93.95%   +1.67%     
==========================================
  Files          10       10              
  Lines        1839     2018     +179     
==========================================
+ Hits         1697     1896     +199     
+ Misses        142      122      -20     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 1546bdc252

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".