Update documentation for `node_load_multiple(FALSE)`.

[avpaderno]

As reported in #5437, calling node_load_multiple() with no arguments returns an empty array, while entity_load_multiple('node'), the function called by node_load_multiple()) returns all nodes as expected.

This happens because the default value for entity_load_multiple()'s $ids is FALSE, while the default value for node_load_multiple()'s $nids is array().

$nids should be documented to accept FALSE as value, which is the value used to return all nodes.

[avpaderno]

The failing tests are for blocks that should appear on a page.

[ghost]

@kiamlaluno It's really hard to review your PR when there are so many unrelated changes. I know they're mostly for fixing coding standard issues, but I think they need to be reviewed properly in their own issue.

Can you please take out changes unrelated to this issue, and perhaps open a new issue to fix the issues in core/modules/node/node.module?

[avpaderno]

@BWPanda I will. I guess that when I created this PR I thought I had to also fix the coding standard issues in the changed file.

[ghost]

Nah. Eventually all existing CS issues will be fixed throughout core, so when the CS action is run on a PR it'll only flag issues with the code that was changed. But until then, it'll flag a bunch of stuff that can be ignored for now. It'd be great to get it fixed as part of an existing PR, but when it makes reviewing the PR difficult then I think a separate issue is necessary.

[avpaderno]

I just added type-hints for node_load_multiple(). I hope that is fine.

[avpaderno]

(I need to remember that the pull-down menu does not remember the labels removed directly from the page.)

[argiepiano]

@kiamlaluno I left a small comment in the PR. Other than that LGMT.

BTW I've noticed that phpcs complains more if you are working from an older version of the dev branch. Rebasing often takes care of most complaints.

[argiepiano]

LGTM.

What type of "milestone" label do documentation changes get?

[bugfolder]

Documentation change to describe existing behavior would be a minor milestone (which I've added).

[avpaderno]

I rebased the PR. It does not seem it helped with phpcs complains, though. (It must be my usual luck. 😅)

[argiepiano]

Documentation change to describe existing behavior would be a minor milestone (which I've added).

If it's minor for the milestone, shouldn't it then be 1.25.0?

[bugfolder]

Brain-fart. I mean bugfix release.

[bugfolder]

Sorry. Features (new features) get minor. Bugfixes and tasks (this was a task) get bugfix release.

[ghost]

Added a suggestion in the PR.

[quicksketch]

Merged into 1.x and 1.24.x. Thanks folks!