Core: add section about trait use statement rules with select new sniffs #2303
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
> ### Trait Use Statements > > Trait use statements should be at the top of a class and should have exactly one blank line before the first use statement, and at least one blank line after the last statement. The only exception is when the class only contains trait use statements, in which case the blank line after may be omitted. > > The following code examples show the formatting requirements for trait use statements regarding things like spacing, grouping and indentation. Refs: * https://make.wordpress.org/core/2020/03/20/updating-the-coding-standards-for-modern-php/ - Trait use statement section * https://developer.wordpress.org/coding-standards/wordpress-coding-standards/php/#trait-use-statements * WordPress/wpcs-docs 101 * WordPress/wpcs-docs 130 * https://www.php-fig.org/psr/psr-12/#42-using-traits The WP rules for traits are very akin to the PSR12 rules with only a few exceptions: * WP allows a blank line between the class/trait declaration statement and the first trait `use` statement. * In the Make post, the proposed rules allowed for single-line `use` statements with conflict resolution. PSR12 always demands multi-line in that case. The upstream PSR12 trait use sniff therefore seems like a good fit. I propose to exclude the "blank line before first `use`" error code to address the first point mentioned above. As for the second point, the code sample which showed the single-line `use` statement in the docs has been updated to multi-line in PR WordPress/wpcs-docs 130. With that change and taking into consideration that these rules are new to WPCS anyway, it makes sense to actually apply the PSR version of the rule demanding that conflict resolution must always be multi-line. Other than that, this PR contains one more exclusion to prevent duplicate error messages about a spacing issue already covered via another sniff. Note: this exclusion won't work (yet) as there is a typo in the upstream sniff. PR squizlabs/PHP_CodeSniffer 3856 is open to fix this.
dingo-d
approved these changes
Jul 19, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Refs:
The WP rules for traits are very akin to the PSR12 rules with only a few exceptions:
usestatement.usestatements with conflict resolution. PSR12 always demands multi-line in that case.The upstream PSR12 trait use sniff therefore seems like a good fit.
I propose to exclude the "blank line before first
use" error code to address the first point mentioned above.As for the second point, the code sample which showed the single-line
usestatement in the docs has been updated to multi-line in PR WordPress/wpcs-docs#130.With that change and taking into consideration that these rules are new to WPCS anyway, it makes sense to actually apply the PSR version of the rule demanding that conflict resolution must always be multi-line.
Other than that, this PR contains one more exclusion to prevent duplicate error messages about a spacing issue already covered via another sniff.
Note: this exclusion won't work (yet) as there is a typo in the upstream sniff. PR squizlabs/PHP_CodeSniffer#3856 is open to fix this.