-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Generic/IncrementDecrementSpacing: handle more situations #3626
Closed
jrfnl
wants to merge
1
commit into
squizlabs:master
from
jrfnl:feature/generic-incrementdecrementspacing-handle-more-cases
+69
−12
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we expand the test case with pre-increments of the array and object properties?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@DannyvdSluijs Good question. In my opinion: no, those tests are not needed as they wouldn't be testing anything (new).
The difference in this case for pre vs post in/decrement is that to identify whether something is a "pre" vs "post" increment (i.e. to identify whether there should be no whitespace after or no whitespace before, the sniff needs to look at different tokens. These extra tests cover the changes I made to that logic.
Adding the same tests for pre-increment wouldn't actually test anything new as it was already handled correctly (as whether something is a plain variable or a non-static property access or array key access on a variable doesn't make a difference in the identification of pre vs post).
For pre-increment, I can think of a further/future iteration for the sniff - checking whether a pre-increment is used on a static property with a fully qualified classname or namespace relative classname, but that is something I choose not to handle (yet) when I made this change last year. When that change would be added, then, yes, extra tests would be needed for pre-in/decrement.
The reason I did not make that change (yet) is that this would need a different patch for PHPCS 3.x vs PHPCS 4.x, which would make the merge more complex. Also see #3041.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That all makes sense to me. Which makes this PR ready to merge as far as I'm concerned.