Skip to content

bug: fix CI on master branch #6663

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 26, 2022
Merged

bug: fix CI on master branch #6663

merged 1 commit into from
Oct 26, 2022

Conversation

kubawerlos
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@kubawerlos kubawerlos requested a review from keradus October 26, 2022 15:19
@@ -261,7 +261,7 @@ protected function doTest(IntegrationCase $case): void
"Expected changes do not match result for \"%s\" in \"%s\".\nFixers applied:\n%s.",
$case->getTitle(),
$case->getFileName(),
null === $changed ? '[None]' : implode(',', $changed['appliedFixers'])
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Member

@keradus keradus Oct 26, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@kubawerlos , I meant why phpstan, on master branch, complains about line 264 but not about line 247?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That's because of line 255 - since we passed assertNotEmpty the value cannot be null.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

oh my. not sure if I like that. like, implementation of assertNotEmpty ext library will change, and if we don't run stan anymore, we are potentially in troubles.
but no-blocking here

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What kind of trouble do you have in mind?

I see it as worst-case scenario we have a type error in sprintf in the assertion message.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What kind ...

calling null['index']

basically I have mixed feeling on assuming foo: Bar|Baz to be only Baz because of some hidden checks in external methods we are calling. but if that's the flow to go I'm not blocking

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In general yes, but I cannot imagine that such a popular tool as PHPUnit changes assertNotEmpty to allow null.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 92.915% when pulling 2f3103c on werlos:fix_ci_on_master into 2ef2025 on FriendsOfPHP:master.

@keradus keradus merged commit 33e56e5 into PHP-CS-Fixer:master Oct 26, 2022
@kubawerlos kubawerlos deleted the fix_ci_on_master branch October 26, 2022 22:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants