[Ref] intial testing on case tokens, make knownTokens optional

[eileenmcnaughton]

Overview

[Ref] intial testing on case tokens, make knownTokens optional

Before

$knownTokens is required, in some cases this makes the calling functions unnecessarily complex

After

$knownTokens is optional, test cover

Technical Details

This is a refactoring baby-step

There is a perception in the token code that passing around knownTokens is more performant

This may or may not be true - but since the goal is to migrate the code to the
token processor making the code simpler is
a higher priority as any performance change will change again.

This makes knownTokens optional in the replaceCaseTokens and adds test cover.
It is a step towards simplification in the PdfLetter code
which could be simplified if not needing to pass in knowntokens here

Comments

[civibot]

(Standard links)

• If this is your first pull-request for CiviCRM, please browse CONTRIBUTING.md for information about the development and testing processes.
• If you are reviewing this pull-request, you may wish to consult the test sites and the Review Standards (long template, short template).

[eileenmcnaughton]

@seamuslee001 @colemanw @demeritcowboy can I get a merge on this - mostly just a test - should be an easy merge

[demeritcowboy]

Case status "ongoing" when it has an end date is a little bit unrealistic, but technically possible. Otherwise I think this PR is ok.

[eileenmcnaughton]

@demeritcowboy I just 'grabbed' 'status_id' => 1, - should it change or should we merge this & ignore

[demeritcowboy]

This test seems unlikely to be used in a way that would enforce that cases with status ongoing should have an end date (or vice-versa). So I'd say it's inconsistent but not "dangerous".

Also noticing that case.contact_id and case.client_id are valid tokens although don't seem to appear in the dropdown on a form. I'm not sure where the dropdown list comes from but I guess that dropdown would be the authority.