I have a trait that must always be mixed in to a subclass of \PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase. PhpStorm doesn't know this. Is there anything I can do to get PhpStorm to autocomplete and "typecheck" things like assertNull inside the trait?
<?php
trait MyTestUtils
{
public function foo()
{
$this->assertNu // autocomplete?
}
}
The best I could come up with so far is putting the following in each method:
/** #var \PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase|MyTestUtils $this */
But this is repetitive and doesn't understand protected memebers. Is there a better option?
Besides using the php docblock to document $this, the only other way I'm aware of, which also, arguably makes your trait more "safe" anyway, is to define abstract methods on the trait itself, e.g.:
trait F {
/**
* #return string[]
*/
abstract public function Foo();
/**
* #return self
*/
abstract public function Bar();
}
abstract class Bar {
use F;
/**
* #return bool|string[]
*/
public function Baz () {
if ($this->Bar()) {
return $this->Foo();
}
return false;
}
}
UPDATE: Since PhpStorm 2016.1.2 (build 145.1616) autocompletion in traits works out-of-the-box. It is smart enough to figure out what classes use the trait, and then provide the autocompletion. Link to the issue: https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/WI-16368
Previously replied with:
You can use:
#method \PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase assertTrue($condition, $message = '')
...in docblock of the trait itself, but the downside is that you'd need to put #method for each method that you'd like to have autocomplete for, which is not too bad if you're using a sane number of method calls in your trait. Or, "document" only those methods that you're using most often.
I would argue that this is not a valid use-case for a PHP trait. Your trait, as written is not guaranteed to only be used on classes that extend \PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase. This introduces very tightly coupled code. The best practice of Traits is for them to be very loosely coupled and only be aware of their own contents.
I would instead recommend that you either:
create a subclass of \PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase that your test cases that need this functionality can extend
create custom assertion classes. These can many times be used for doing groups of custom assertions.
Both techniques are detailed here: http://phpunit.de/manual/4.1/en/extending-phpunit.html
These are the two recommended best practices for where to place helper methods such as these.
Related
When in a class there is the ability to autocomplete certain methods, e.g. the constructor or some inherited functions. I'd like to add some custom methods like public function foo():void to the autocomplete if a specific trait is applied. First I thought of Live Templates but they cannot be constrained to be only applied if there is a certain trait present.
Do you have any idea how I could achieve this? Maybe by generating some docblocks?
You can use #method tag in PHPDoc comment for the trait to declare such "virtual" methods. Modern PhpStorm versions can offer such signature when invoking code completion when declaring a new method.
<?php
declare(strict_types=1);
/**
* #method void traitPublic()
*/
trait T
{
private function traitPrivate(): void
{
}
}
class C
{
use T;
}
I am currently on PHPUnit v5.7.27
I would like to create a mock object that uses an array of traits. How would I go about this? I only see getMockForTrait as a way to create a mock object using a single trait. My issue is that the trait requires the existence of another trait at the class level.
Update: More context to the issue
Given:
trait GetSet {
public function __call(){ /* does some magic */
}
trait RepositoryAware {
public function getRepository(string $name)
{
/* makes use of the GetSetTrait*/
}
}
class Controller
{
use GetSet;
use RepositoryAware;
}
Given the limitations of PHP, I can not simply put a use GetSet on the RepositoryAware trait because other traits that the controller imports could also bring the GetSet trait. Furhtermore, the controller class itself could be using the behavior provided by the GetSet trait.
The current solution I have is to create a Dummy Class that imports both traits and mock that class instead:
class RepositoryAwareClass
{
use GetSet;
use RepositoryAware;
}
Like this I am able to properly test the behavior provided by the RepositoryAware trait while at the same time composing its requirement of the GetSet trait.
Mocking concept was built with the idea that you would be using dependency injection. I can certainly see why you may not want to use dependency injection with this multiple inheritance like model that php uses called "Traits". Mocking tools like the one built for phpunit was built to substitute instances of objects not classes/interfaces/traits themselves. PHP Traits are more like having a static dependency instead of a dependency on an instance of an object. However, even if you were using traits and assuming a trait was basically the same as a class, according to mocking best practices should test the trait as its own test instead of testing a trait through another class. If you want to mock the trait itself you may want to try to revisit your design as I do not believe it can be done. You can certainly mock a trait and test that trait but you cannot mock a trait and then inject it as a dependency on an object. Imagine that a class for example implements an interface, mocking a trait would be the same a mocking an interface that a class implements, its not possible. You can only mock an interface of an object that a class depends upon through setter or constructor based dependency injection. Another example would be to try and mock the class that the class under test inherits from. You can't do that either. Perhaps in the javascript world this type of thing could be useful and from some people's point of view desired, but I think if you want to use mocking you would need to stick with object dependency injection instead of static use of traits.
So what's the alternative? I think the following example would be how to use perhaps "traditional" OOP practices with mocking to achieve your goal of sharing functionality without using inheritance. The example also makes your dependencies more explicit. And for the record, I applaud you for NOT using inheritance.
<?php
interface GetterSetter {
public function __call();
}
interface RepositoryProvider {
public function getRepository(string $name);
}
class GetSet implements GetterSetter {
public function __call() {
/* does some magic */
}
}
class DefaultRepository implements RepositoryProvider, GetterSetter {
/**
* #var GetterSetter
*/
private $_getterSetter;
public function __construct(GetterSetter $getterSetter) {
$this->_getterSetter = $getterSetter;
}
public function getRepository(string $name) {
// makes use of the GetSetTrait
$this->__call();
}
public function __call() {
// makes use of the GetSetTrait
$this->_getterSetter->__call();
}
}
class Controller implements RepositoryProvider, GetterSetter {
/**
* #var RepositoryProvider
*/
private $repositoryProvider;
public function __construct() {
$this->repositoryProvider = new DefaultRepository(new GetSet());
}
public function getRepository(string $name) {
return $this->repositoryProvider->getRepository($name);
}
public function __call() {
$this->repositoryProvider->__call();
}
}
In general I feel like the PHP community took a wild left turn, trying to be more like javascript and I feel that traits can walk you into a corner. This is a very good example of such a corner. I would really avoid them, at least for now. In the long run I believe Generics would be the better solution to your problem of needing a generic GetSet piece of code but generics haven't been implemented in php yet :-(.
I need to add $variable in my php return document
for example I have this function :
/**
* #return \Panel\Model\{$Service}
*/
public function getService($Service){
// I call service `foo` from Model folder
}
I see this post : What's the meaning of #var in php comments but it has no information about how to do it , and also study #var-phpdoc but that has nothing for me.
if you ask me why I should do that , because I want use phpStorm Ctrl+Click advantage on $this->getService('foo')->bar()
thanks in advance
As LazyOne said in the comments already PHP interfaces should solve your problem. You can 't use variables in PHPDoc formatted comments. Sure, if you use an IDE like PHPStorm with a plugin that enables the usage of variables in PHPDoc comments, the problem is solved for yourself. What, when other developers, which don 't use PHPStorm or the relevant plugin, want to work in the same project? In my view you should use php native functionality to solve your issue.
Here 's a short example how to use interfaces.
declare('strict_types=1');
namespace Application\Model;
interface ModelInterface
{
public function getFoo() : string;
public function setFoo() : ModelInterface;
}
The only thing you have to do now is using this interface with your models like in the following example.
declare('strict_types=1');
namespace Application\Model;
class FooModel implements ModelInterface
{
protected $foo = '';
public function getFoo() : string
{
return $this->foo;
}
public function setFoo(string $foo) : ModelInterface
{
$this->foo = $foo;
return $this;
}
}
As you can see the FooModel class implements the ModelInterface interface. So you have to use the methods declared in the interface in you model class. This means, that your getService Method could look like the following example.
/**
* Some getter function to get a model
* #return \Application\Model\ModelInterface
*/
public function getService($service) : ModelInterface
{
return $service->get(\Application\Model\Foo::class);
}
Your IDE knows now which methods the returned class can use. It allows you to use chaining and some more features. While typing your IDE should know now, that the returned class can use getFoo and setFoo methods. Further the setFoo methods enables comfortable chaining for calls like ..
// variable contains the string 'foo'
// your ide knows all methods
$fooString = $this->getService($serviceLocator)->setFoo('foo')->getFoo();
Are you using Symfony? Then you could use the Symfony plugin that solves this problem for you. For other frameworks, there should be similar solutions. If you use your own framework, you need to write such a plugin on your own, as PhpStorm can not resolve the given class otherwise.
I think what you are looking for is phpdoc.
https://docs.phpdoc.org/guides/docblocks.html
/**
* #param string $Service This is the description.
* #return \Panel\Model\{$Service}
*/
public function getService($Service){
// I call service `foo` from Model folder
}
I've used another class as Dependency Injection is it good to work around or I've messed up the OOP way.
Helper.php
class Helper {
public function getModulePermission($role_id, $module, $type) {
// my work code
}
}
DesignationController.php
use App\Helpers\Helper;
class DesignationController extends Controller {
protected $designation;
protected $helper;
/**
* #param DesignationContract $designation
* #param Helper $helper
*/
public function __construct(DesignationContract $designation, Helper $helper) {
$this->designation = $designation;
$this->helper = $helper;
}
/**
* Display a listing of the resource.
*
* #return Response
*/
public function index(Request $request) {
$permission = $this->helper->getModulePermission($request->id, 'Designation', 'view');
if ($permission) {
return true;
} else {
return view('errors.forbidden');
}
}
So I've a class named Helper which can be accessed within each and every controller for checking permissions but I thought that I've messed up the OOP functionality over here. Is it good to work like it as or I need to create an Interface instead of class
Those are two different OOP concepts. the interface forces whoever class implement it to implement functions stated in the interface (called function signature). So for multiple classes implement the same interface, you will end up with multiple classes implement the same set of functions (wither it is the same function body or not).
The second concept is called, dependency injection or inversion of control in some cases. you inject a class either via class constructor or via setters and you call certain function provided by the injected class. Here you will have the same function called by multiple classes which is good for less modification by using common (injected) class, easier unit-testing (you can mock objects easily), more modular code (you can inject different class if you want different functionality).
So the current situation is good enough but it all depends in what you want to do which stated above.
I don't like the name, it speaks nothing to me or gives me an idea that this class can help me get the permissions of the module. Moreover, with a name like this, one can simply put another method, like lets say Helper::login($id) or you name it, which will instantly break the single responsibility principle (laravel controllers do that anyway).
The injection is relatively OK, perhaps a middleware class would be better place to do that.
When mocking an interface in PHPUnit, PhpStorm complains when it's used as parameter for a type-hinted function.
Example
interface InterfaceA{
}
class ClassA{
public function foo(InterfaceA $foo){}
}
class PhpStormTest extends PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase
{
public function testFoo(){
$mock = $this->getMock("InterfaceA");
$a = new ClassA();
$a->foo($mock);
}
}
On $a->foo($mock); PhpStorm underlines $mock with the warning Expected InterfaceA, got PHPUnit_Framework_MockObject_MockObject
Image
I guess it's happening because PHPUnit creates the mock a runtime and PhpStorm cannot know that it's actually implementing the interface.
I found a workaround to this problem in the Jetbrain blog at PhpStorm Type Inference and Mocking Frameworks. The important part:
By default, PhpStorm is capable of figuring out the available methods
on the mock object. However, it only displays those for PHPUnit’s
PHPUnit_Framework_MockObject_MockObject class. Fortunately, we can
solve this by instructing PhpStorm to infer type information from
other classes as well, by using a simple docblock comment.
So to make the warning disappear, we need to add /** #var InterfaceA */ /** #var InterfaceA|PHPUnit_Framework_MockObject_MockObject */ (cudos to Supericy) to let PhpStorm know our mock actually implements InterfaceA:
interface InterfaceA{
}
class ClassA{
public function foo(InterfaceA $foo){}
}
class PhpStormTest extends PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase
{
public function testFoo(){
/** #var InterfaceA|PHPUnit_Framework_MockObject_MockObject */
$mock = $this->getMock("InterfaceA");
$a = new ClassA();
$a->foo($mock);
}
}
This bugged me for some time, hope it helps someone :)
Edit
Since PHPUnit_Framework_MockObject_MockObject is really ugly to type, you can abbreviate it via MOOMOO and let PHPStorms auto-complete do the rest:
Another plugin I have used for this is the Dynamic Return Type Plugin, it lets you configure return types of methods in a very dynamic way (the example is to have better type information from Mocks).
Another, less verbose but possibly riskier, approach can be to wrap the call to getMock() with your own function and mark that with #return mixed:
/**
*
* #return mixed
*/
public function myGetMock($str)
{
return $this->getMock($str);
}
Calling this method instead of $this->getMock() will make the warning disappear.