Closes #7123: Rules about get_subscribed_events

[Miraeld]

Description

Fixes #7123

This won't impact users.

Type of change

• [x] Enhancement (non-breaking change which improves an existing functionality).
• [x] Sub-task of #7122

Detailed scenario

Just run PHPStan

Technical description

Documentation

This pull request introduces several changes related to PHPStan integration and testing in the project. The most significant updates include adding new PHPStan rules and tests, modifying the configuration files, and ensuring callback methods exist in subscribed events.

PHPStan Integration and Configuration:

• composer.json: Added new scripts to run PHPStan with specific options (run-stan-reset-baseline, run-stan-test).
• phpstan.neon.dist: Updated parameters to include new paths and rules, and modified reporting settings. [1] [2]

New PHPStan Rule:

• tests/phpstan/Rules/EnsureCallbackMethodsExistsInSubscribedEvents.php: Implemented a new PHPStan rule to ensure callback methods exist in subscribed events.

Tests for New Rule:

• tests/phpstan/tests/Rules/EnsureCallbackMethodsExistsInSubscribedEventsTest.php: Added tests to validate the new PHPStan rule, including tests for valid subscribers, non-existing methods, and complex syntax.
• Added supporting test data files for the new rule:
  • tests/phpstan/tests/data/EnsureCallbackMethodsExistsInSubscribedEventsTest/complex-syntax.php
  • tests/phpstan/tests/data/EnsureCallbackMethodsExistsInSubscribedEventsTest/not-existing.php
  • tests/phpstan/tests/data/EnsureCallbackMethodsExistsInSubscribedEventsTest/valid.php

PHPUnit Configuration:

• tests/phpstan/tests/bootstrap.php: Added bootstrap file for PHPUnit tests.
• tests/phpstan/tests/phpunit.xml: Added PHPUnit configuration file to define test suites and coverage settings.

New dependencies

None

Risks

None

Mandatory Checklist

Code validation

• [x] I validated all the Acceptance Criteria. If possible, provide screenshots or videos.
• [x] I triggered all changed lines of code at least once without new errors/warnings/notices.
• [x] I implemented built-in tests to cover the new/changed code.

Code style

• [x] I wrote a self-explanatory code about what it does.
• [x] I protected entry points against unexpected inputs.
• [x] I did not introduce unnecessary complexity.
• [x] Output messages (errors, notices, logs) are explicit enough for users to understand the issue and are actionnable.

[codacy-production[bot]]

Coverage summary from Codacy

See diff coverage on Codacy

Coverage variation	Diff coverage
Report missing for 90ca318cece30d1c6404e86cc885795163a95ba1[^1]	:white_check_mark: ∅ (target: 50.00%)

Coverage variation details

| | Coverable lines | Covered lines | Coverage | | ------------- | ------------- | ------------- | ------------- | | Common ancestor commit (90ca318cece30d1c6404e86cc885795163a95ba1) | Report Missing | Report Missing | Report Missing | | | Head commit (3fb06c76a4074f542dfaf47d03df1c4224493d74) | 38228 | 16731 | 43.77% | **Coverage variation** is the difference between the coverage for the head and common ancestor commits of the pull request branch: ` - `

Diff coverage details

| | Coverable lines | Covered lines | Diff coverage | | ------------- | ------------- | ------------- | ------------- | | Pull request (#7124) | 0 | 0 | **∅ (not applicable)** | **Diff coverage** is the percentage of lines that are covered by tests out of the coverable lines that the pull request added or modified: `/ * 100%`

See your quality gate settings    Change summary preferences

_{Codacy stopped sending the deprecated coverage status on June 5th, 2024. Learn more} [^1]: Codacy didn't receive coverage data for the commit, or there was an error processing the received data. Check your integration for errors and validate that your coverage setup is correct.

[Miraeld]

I've treated your feedback @CrochetFeve0251 , Also, modified the way it was working a bit to comply with your tests.

Also, you'll notice I've added some // @php-stan-ignore-[next]-line That's because when phpstan run within this class, it kinda gets messed up with some type, even tho it's explicit, and due to this it thinks some part of the code are unreachable while in real they are.

I add a screenshot of your test passing as it isn't part of the CI in here.