We are running phpstan on a laminas project and running into errors.
As an example, in the controller we have some standard code which works fine.
$request = $this->getRequest();
if ($request->isPost()) { ... }
However phpstan is complaining:
Call to an undefined method Laminas\Stdlib\RequestInterface::isPost()
The problem appears that getRequest() is actually returning an instance of Laminas\Http\PhpEnvironment\Request which does inherit the isPost function from Laminas\Http\Request. But this function is not defined in RequestInterface.
One solution would be to define isPost in RequestInterface although I would prefer to avoid changes to the vendor code.
Is there a better way of getting round this?
Related
So I have an object which I am mocking and it has methods that are used for sending emails. I have gone from a static class over to a concrete class because I was having issues testing the static class with Mockery.
However I am now finding that when an eloquent model is saved it throws an event which fires off a listener. This listener is what is responsible for kicking off the call to the mock objects method.
I have found that when I do something like the following it works.
$model = factory(MyClass::class)->make();
$model->property = 'value';
$model->save()
$this->mailer->shouldHaveReceived('methodName')->with($arg1, $arg2, $arg3);
It will fail every time complaining that the method does not exist on the mock object, the worst part is if I go into my listener where the mock object method is called and I do something like this
echo '<pre>'.print_r(get_class_methods($this->mailer), true).'</pre>'; exit;
it shows that the method is in-fact in the array of methods returned from get_class_methods.
Now here is the kicker. Everything works perfectly and the test passes without any errors if I do the following:
$this->mailer->shouldReceive('methodName');
$model = factory(MyClass::class)->make();
$model->property = 'value';
$model->save()
Now I have been reading the Mockery Gotchas and it would appear that if my class was calling a method that truly didn't exist on the object via ___call then this error would be expected.
However my mailer class is NOT extending any other class that would have a __call method nor does it have that method defined on the class.
However as you may or may not know Eloquent Models do in-fact use the magic ___call method. However I am NOT mocking the model with Mockery, I am using factory models in Laravel but I am also not checking the model object for the method call, I am checking my concrete mailer class for the method call.
Anyone know why I might be getting this behavior from Mockery?
I am creating my mock object in Laravel 5.2 with the following code
public function mock($class)
{
$mock = Mockery::mock($class);
$this->app->instance($class, $mock);
return $mock;
}
$this->mailer = $this->mock('Namespace\Classname');
How are you creating $this->mailer? In order to be able to use the spy functionality ->shouldHaveReceived, you need to have invoked Mockery::spy($className) or called the shouldIgnoreMissing method after creating the test double with Mockery::mock($className).
Let's keep it simple.
We have this:
public function db($method)
{
$this->$method.'()';
}
I'am sure this is pretty self explanatory. Basically I want all my methods to be called trough this method 'db', but this is the error:
Message: Undefined property: site::$db
Ehm...
I guess I could write all the possible cases by hand, but is it really necessary??
Did you tried call_user_func($function);
Or
$this->$function()
Or
$this->{$function}()
I'm trying to pull two parameters into my Controller's __construct() method, but I keep getting the following debug
Call to undefined method Illuminate\Routing\Router::parameters()
What I'm specifically trying to do is.
Pull the "portal" and "issue" parameters into my __construct and set the $currentPortal and $currentIssue variables in my class (protected variables)
Use those two protected vars when I please in different Controller actions
Down below you'll find my __construct() method
protected $portals, $issues, $currentPortal, $currentIssue;
public function __construct(\App\Entities\Portal $portals, \App\Entities\Issue $issues){
$this->portals = $portals;
$this->issues = $issues;
dd(\Route::parameters());
if($portal = \Route::getParameter('portal'))
$this->currentPortal = $this->portals->findBySlug($portal);
if($issue = \Route::getParameter('issue'))
$this->currentIssue = $this->issues->findByKey($issue);
}
As you can notice, I'm using dd() as a debug helper in order to see if the current Route parameters and being pulled.
There's no issue in the router.php definitions, as I have already tested them before trying to implement this handy "hack" to pull the current objects.
Any help in order to get the current Route params?
Thanks!
Oh yeah, I figured it out just after posting this question!
I'm leaving the answer in case anyone is having the same issue as I was..
You need to pull the current() route before appending any other requests, so in my case, I should've done
Route::current()->getParameter('MY PARAM NAME')
That should be it
I'm trying to develop a package, so I've followed this tutorial until Creating a Facade section because I don't need a facade.
The problem is:
/app/routes.php
Route::get('test', 'Aristona\Installer\Installer#install');
throws an exception: Call to undefined method Aristona\Installer\Installer::callAction()
My Installer.php is like this:
workbench/aristona/installer/src/Aristona/Installer/Installer.php
<?php namespace Aristona\Installer;
class Installer
{
public static function install()
{
return "Hello";
}
}
The class is loading. I've added it to my service providers list. Also I can confirm it is loading by adding one more install method, because PHP throws a fatal error about redeclaring same method twice.
I've tried different combinations on my method prefixes (e.g without static) Doesn't solve.
Anyone know what am I doing wrong?
Your getting an error because you're trying to use routing to controller where none exists. To be more specific, Laravel is trying to perform this method from it's core Controller class:
/**
* Execute an action on the controller.
*
* #param string $method
* #param array $parameters
* #return \Symfony\Component\HttpFoundation\Response
*/
public function callAction($method, $parameters)
{
$this->setupLayout();
$response = call_user_func_array(array($this, $method), $parameters);
// If no response is returned from the controller action and a layout is being
// used we will assume we want to just return the layout view as any nested
// views were probably bound on this view during this controller actions.
if (is_null($response) && ! is_null($this->layout))
{
$response = $this->layout;
}
return $response;
}
So unless the class you're specifying in Route::get() is extending either BaseController or Controller, this exception will be thrown. If you tested the same method inside a closure, it would work.
More about Laravel controller routing can be found here.
To fix this, you should either add a controller to your package or use the Installer class inside another controller.
I have been digging in the core of Laravel because I would like to understand how it works. But I come up with a method that I just cannot wrap my head around even after 3 days.
In start.php the app is binded to itself. So far so good. But when I check the $app->share method I am lost.
public function share(Closure $closure)
{
return function($container) use ($closure)
{
// We'll simply declare a static variable within the Closures and if
// it has not been set we'll execute the given Closure to resolve
// the value and return it back to the consumers of the method.
static $object;
if (is_null($object))
{
$object = $closure($container);
}
return $object;
};
}
This method returns an anonymous function which when executed returns an instance of the app. Do I see that right? Why is this? Why do you want to return a closure and not just the instance. This seems like a strange way, but I am quite sure that there is a reason ;) ??
UPDATE
The line in start.php:
$app['app'] = $app->share(function($app) { return $app; });
So I would think that $app['app'] is a closure object. However if I do get_class the class is Illuminate\Foundation\Application .
Furthermore there is also no way to execute it as $app'app' will not work obviously.
$app is no normal array, it is actually an instance of Illuminate\Foundation\Application1, an extension of Illuminate\Container\Container2, which implements ArrayAccess. But you know this already, as that's where the share() method lives.
The container binds keys to closures, when the keys are accessed the value is fetched from memory or, on first access, the bound closure is called and the resulting value is returned. When a key is set on the container it is wrapped in a closure unless it is already a closure.
This provides a consistent internal interface for the container, so that the code is not constantly type checking its contents. It will also only load the references you actually use are into memory - it is thought that the footprint of a closure is lighter than that of a fully loaded class instance. But once loaded, you get the benefit of working with the same instance for the rest of the request.
Why the app is not registered on the container using instance() I don't know though - perhaps it produces recursive references in trace and dump output.