[phpMyAdmin Developers] PHPCS: leading underscore on protected / private attributes / methods

[Marc Delisle]

Le 2015-08-26 05:34, Hugues Peccatte a écrit :
> Le mar. 25 août 2015 à 15:40, Hugues Peccatte <hugues.peccatte at gmail.com
> <mailto:hugues.peccatte at gmail.com>> a écrit :
> 
>     Le mar. 25 août 2015 à 12:06, Atul Pratap Singh
>     <atulpratapsingh05 at gmail.com <mailto:atulpratapsingh05 at gmail.com>> a
>     écrit :
> 
>         On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 12:28 AM, Hugues Peccatte
>         <hugues.peccatte at gmail.com <mailto:hugues.peccatte at gmail.com>>
>         wrote:
> 
>             Hi,
> 
>             phpMyAdmin's ruleset is based on PEAR standards. One of this
>             standard
>             (PEAR_Sniffs_NamingConventions_ValidVariableNameSniff) is to
>             name class' attributes / methods with a leading underscore
>             when the element is protected / private.
>             This rule is quite useful because it helps to see very
>             quickly if an element is public or not.
>             But http://www.php-fig.org/psr/psr-2/#4-2-properties asks
>             not to use this leading underscore.
>             For attributes, I'm not sure this is a big deal because
>             almost all the attributes shouldn't be visible and
>             accessible only by getters / setters. But for methods, there
>             is nothing to know the visibility of a method. However
>             actual IDE help to see this.
> 
>             Do you think that we should follow PSR2? Only for attributes
>             maybe?
>             Should we consider to base our ruleset on another standard
>             closest to PSR rules?
> 
>         Hi,
> 
>         I agree to follow PSR-2 no underscore recommendation for
>         attributes and going forward we may lean more towards PSR,
>         specifically about achieving codebase wide autoloading of
>         classes(PSR-4).
> 
>         Also, I
>         think https://github.com/phpmyadmin/phpmyadmin/pull/11365 needs
>         to be rebased.
> 
> 
>         --
>         Regards
> 
>         Atul Pratap Singh
> 
>      
>     Hi,
> 
>     I won't rebase the branch but remove it.
>     I'll see the modifications I can do to stick to PSR 0 to 2 rules.
> 
>     H.
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Some days ago, we spoke about this code in all files:
> if (! defined('PHPMYADMIN')) {
>     exit;
> }
> 
> In PSR, one of the rules is the "side effects" [0]. This rule says not
> to have class/functions/etc declaration and execution in the same file.
> And the code above is considered as execution. So here I don't want to
> restart the discussion, but we may have to change this if we really want
> to stick (not sure about this english word…) to PSR rules.
> 
> H.
> 
> [0] http://www.php-fig.org/psr/psr-1/#2-3-side-effects

This constant verification can safely be removed if there is no other
"execution" code in the file.


-- 
Marc Delisle | phpMyAdmin