FIX: Custom processors serialises enum by index rather than by value.

[AswinRajGopal]

Description

Bug: https://issuetracker.unity3d.com/product/unity/issues/guid/ISXB-1474
Port 1.13.1

The issue is that the DropdownField expects a selected index (starting at 0), but the enum’s underlying values (10, 20, 30..) don't match these indices. Instead of passing the enum’s integer value directly, I have mapped the value to the correct index in the list of enum options.

An automated test added which validates that a custom input processor with an enumerated parameter integrates correctly with both the Unity Input System’s asset serialization and its UI.

The issue is that

Testing status & QA

Verified manually in windows machine with the provided repro project.
Authored an automated test to cover the fix.

Observer details of the test run:

Overall Product Risks

• Complexity: 0
• Halo Effect: 0

Comments to reviewers

Checklist

Before review:

• Changelog entry added.
  • Explains the change in Changed, Fixed, Added sections.
  • For API change contains an example snippet and/or migration example.
  • JIRA ticket linked, example (case %%). If it is a private issue, just add the case ID without a link.
  • Jira port for the next release set as "Resolved".
• Tests added/changed, if applicable.
  • Functional tests Area_CanDoX, Area_CanDoX_EvenIfYIsTheCase, Area_WhenIDoX_AndYHappens_ThisIsTheResult.
  • Performance tests.
  • Integration tests.
• Docs for new/changed API's.
  • Xmldoc cross references are set correctly.
  • Added explanation how the API works.
  • Usage code examples added.
  • The manual is updated, if needed.

During merge:

• Commit message for squash-merge is prefixed with one of the list:
  • NEW: ___.
  • FIX: ___.
  • DOCS: ___.
  • CHANGE: ___.
  • RELEASE: 1.1.0-preview.3.

After merge:

• Create forward/backward port if needed. If you are blocked from creating a forward port now please add a task to ISX-1444.

[unity-cla-assistant]

Thank you for your submission! We really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you all sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.
1 out of 2 committers have signed the CLA.

✅ Pauliusd01
❌ AswinRajGopal
_{You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.}

[ekcoh]

@AswinRajGopal Its generally recommended to add one developer on the team and one QA as reviewers on the PR when published. This will help making sure you receive feedback on it.

Looks like there are CI failures for non-required tests and that branch is outdated. I would recommend updating the branch (which will automatically re-run CI).

[ekcoh]

@AswinRajGopal I notice you have published internal URLs in this public-facing PR. This should be avoided. Instead use public URLs to issue tickets when available and otherwise only use issue number (without link). I will remove the URLs for now.

[ekcoh]

Thanks for looking into this @AswinRajGopal! Left some comments on things to address.

[ekcoh]

Thanks for adding this, increases readability significantly

[ekcoh]

Thanks for addressing comments. Changes look good to me now.