Endpoint request body model type mappings

[addshore]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

I have a struct defined that I use as JSON body input for a handler

type PutPlanInput struct {
	PlanId int32 `json:"planId" binding:"required"`
	RenewOnto Optional[int32] `json:"renewOnto"`
	RenewQuantity Optional[int32] `json:"renewQuantity"`
}

I am making use of an Optional pattern, so that I can determine if the value was 1) set and is null 2) not set
The rest of that code looks like this

type Optional[T any] struct {
	Value   *T
	Defined bool
}

func (t *Optional[T]) UnmarshalJSON(data []byte) error {
	t.Defined = true
	return json.Unmarshal(data, &t.Value)
}

func (t *Optional[T]) IsNullDefined() bool {
	return t.Defined && t.Value == nil
}

This however results in swaggo generating the fallowing swagger spec, which is not actually what I want the user to see.

            "properties": {
                "planId": {
                    "type": "integer"
                },
                "renewOnto": {
                    "allOf": [
                        {
                            "$ref": "#/definitions/api_handlers_devices.Optional-int32"
                        }
                    ]
                },
                "renewQuantity": {
                    "allOf": [
                        {
                            "$ref": "#/definitions/api_handlers_devices.Optional-int32"
                        }
                    ]
                }
            }

Describe the solution you'd like

I'd like some way to override Optional[int32] to actual render as int32 in the swagger output.
I took a look at https://github.com/swaggo/swag#model-composition-in-response and if this were implemented for requests too, I could likely do something like this.

// @Param request body PutPlanInput{renewOnto=int32,renewQuantity=int32} true "Request"

Describe alternatives you've considered

• There could be some generic type mapping so a user defined list of things could be switched Optional[int32] -> int32 for example
• Extra annotations on the struct could also enable this mapping?