wickedOne
wickedOne
ah ic, you want the parameter requirement to be dropped raqther than the docblock requirement. would make sense with php 7.4+ and property typing i guess...
though i understand your sentiment, my problem with this is that it's not part of the coding standard / explicitly stated. so i'd vote for removal of the paramter annotation...
you could consider aliasing your annotations? ```php /** * @Tests\expectedException \Exception * @Tests\expectedExceptionMessage Don't do it. */ public function testThing() {} ``` should be valid.
i have no idea whether that's possible with phpunit's annotation parser tbh... > But I don't think this looks right i don't think that's really the purpose of a coding...
@CarsonF it looks like all your references point to test classes which clearly do not comply to a lot of standards (no class comment, no function comments, multiple classes in...
thanks for your input @CarsonF ! there are more duplicates (``ClassDeclaration.MissingBrace``, ``ScopeClosingBrace.indent`` to name a few) it's not that this blocks phpcs from running nor that either of them is...
yes, feel free to create a PR (personally i'd keep the ``PSR2`` as well).
hi there, yes, as far as i know you're right and there's currently no built in support for solr's term vector component in solarium. in theory (to be clear, i've...
i don't really get the coverage decrease of 0.01%...
> We should a a dedicated page to the docs to explain the date time handling. I can do that when we agree on the function names. yes, i'm fine...