Support matching reflected binding names

[cgillum]

Context

I ran into an issue when trying to get Durable Functions triggers to work with the isolated worker.

The current rule for extensions is that the attribute name in Worker.Extensions.* must match the attribute name in the corresponding WebJobs.Extensions.*. However, this doesn't work when the WebJobs attribute doesn't end with "InputAttribute" or "OutputAttribute". For example, when I created an attribute named DurableClientAttribute in the worker repo, the function.json that got generated looked like the following:

  {
    "name": "json",
    "type": "DurableClientAttribute",
    "direction": "In",
    "dataType": "String"
  },

The type property value is obviously wrong and resulted in the function app not being able to start.

Fix

I've updated the SDK build task to make my scenario work according to the naming guidelines in WebJobs. I've also lowercased the first latter of the type value so that it matches the documentation (this is slightly vain since types appear to be case-insensitive, but I think it's going to be safer this way in case other tools/systems aren't case-insensitive).

The result was the following:

  {
    "name": "json",
    "type": "durableClient",
    "direction": "In",
    "dataType": "String"
  },

With this change, the function app was able to start and invoke the binding correctly.

[kshyju]

Should we consider adding a test to FunctionMetadataGeneratorTests for the DurableClientAttribute case ? I do not see any for durable attribute in that today.

[cgillum]

I'm thinking I'll wait until we've added the durable attributes before adding those specific tests. That's going to be a much larger PR though.