codecov[bot]
commented
8 months ago Codecov Report
All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:
Project coverage is 99.18%. Comparing base (
6e3cf11) to head (24fb8f1). Report is 5 commits behind head on master.:exclamation: Current head 24fb8f1 differs from pull request most recent head 45fe5fd. Consider uploading reports for the commit 45fe5fd to get more accurate results
Additional details and impacted files
```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #120 +/- ## ============================================ - Coverage 99.21% 99.18% -0.03% Complexity 111 111 ============================================ Files 7 7 Lines 380 370 -10 ============================================ - Hits 377 367 -10 Misses 3 3 ```:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
phil-davis
php-cs-fixer 3.49 (or some recent minor release) wants to use the
?(nullable) syntax on optional parameters. That syntax has been supported for quite a while since PHP https://www.php.net/manual/en/migration71.new-features.phpIn the cases here, as well as the default value of the parameter being
null, the?explicitly allows the caller to pass the valuenullif they want.And some mentions of type
booleanchange to justbool- that seems "a good thing" because of https://www.php.net/manual/en/language.types.declarations.php "Warning Name aliases for scalar types (bool, int, float, string) are not supported. Instead, they are treated as class or interface names. For example, using boolean as a type declaration will require the value to be an instanceof the class or interface boolean, rather than of type bool"php-cs-fixer has only found things to fix in the PHP doc for this
boolthing, so no actual code effect to think about.These seem reasonable, I don't see how it can break any existing usage.