Squiz.Arrays.ArrayDeclaration sniff not very configurable

[JDGrimes]

The Squiz.Arrays.ArrayDeclaration sniff is somewhat generic, but attempting to configure it to disable some errors by placing this in a ruleset will inadvertently disable other errors too:

    <rule ref="Squiz.Arrays.ArrayDeclaration">
        <exclude name="Squiz.Arrays.ArrayDeclaration.ValueNotAligned" />
        <exclude name="Squiz.Arrays.ArrayDeclaration.KeyNotAligned" />
        <exclude name="Squiz.Arrays.ArrayDeclaration.DoubleArrowNotAligned" />
        <exclude name="Squiz.Arrays.ArrayDeclaration.ValueNotAligned" />
        <exclude name="Squiz.Arrays.ArrayDeclaration.CloseBraceNotAligned" />
        <exclude name="Squiz.Arrays.ArrayDeclaration.ValueNoNewline" />
        <exclude name="Squiz.Arrays.ArrayDeclaration.MultiLineNotAllowed" />
        <exclude name="Squiz.Arrays.ArrayDeclaration.SingleLineNotAllowed" />
    </rule>

Basically, I'm not concerned about the alignment rules, but I'd like to still get the other errors, including the NoComma error when there is a missing comma, as in the following code:

array(
    'foo' => 1,
    'bar' => 2 // <-- missing comma, should give error.
);

However, due to logic of the processMultiLineArray() method, this error won't be given if alignment errors are disabled. Actually, it wouldn't be given even if the alignment errors were enabled, because only one error is given per-index within the loop. After a violation is found, continue is called. Maybe this is intended behavior, but it makes the sniff less configurable. Could this maybe be made more generic? Maybe custom indentation schemes could be defined?

[gsherwood]

It's probably best not to use that sniff unless you want everything it provides. It doesn't split all those checks into various sniffs because the lead-up work to parse the array would take too long over a large code base when run multiple times for each array.

It also stop processing at various places to ensure it doesn't generate incorrect errors.

So yes, it is a complex and non-configurable sniff because it exactly implements a single method of defining arrays for the Squiz standard. I'll leave this open as a feature request, but I don't have any plans on making it configurable. I think it would be better to write a new Generic sniffs (or sniffs) to implement checks that are more commonly used.

[JDGrimes]

OK. I started thinking that maybe a flag could be introduced that would just turn off the indentation part. But I'd have to dig into the logic a little more to see if it would be possible to that cleanly without still having the sniff do lot's of extra work.

[frvge]

+1 for more configuration possibilities (I ended up removing the sniff because of the alignment). Maybe it's possible to cache things somewhere based on the start of the token?

[gsherwood]

Reposting a comment from #815:

There is no point making modifications to this sniff. The only reason people ask for it is because it is the only sniff that actually checks array formats, but the formatting is bespoke and annoying.

Setting the indent to 4 spaces wont help you because it would want it indented to exactly 4 spaces after the open array token. What you (and the majority of developers, including me) probably want is to have content indented to the next tab stop (based on your indent rules) no matter how many spaces that actually is. This lets you easily indent arrays by just tabbing as normal.

What I want to do is write a set of new array sniffs in the Generic standard to enforce a few key concepts. You can then use as many or as few as you want in a custom standard. The ones I am planning are:

• comma after all array values
• indent values to next tab stop
• align => in key/value pairs

Then I'll probably change the existing Squiz sniff to remove a lot of checks, or remove the sniff entirely if the job can be done with other sniffs.

[beporter]

@gsherwood That's great to hear. A sniff that can enforce trailing commas (on multi-line arrays only) has been on my todo list for a long time. Is there anything we can do to help or make the job easier for you?

[aik099]

A sniff that can enforce trailing commas (on multi-line arrays only) has been on my todo list for a long time.

I've created such sniff myself for my standard. If you want you can use it: https://github.com/aik099/CodingStandard/blob/master/CodingStandard/Sniffs/Array/ArraySniff.php

[sebastienbarre]

Thanks @gsherwood; after spending some time looking at that Sniff to find why some rules where not triggered (early return were to blame), I understand there is probably no point sending a PR to add a configuration option. I was wondering if these new array sniffs were somewhere in a branch maybe? Thank you.

What I want to do is write a set of new array sniffs in the Generic standard to enforce a few key
concepts. You can then use as many or as few as you want in a custom standard. The ones I am
planning are:
comma after all array values
indent values to next tab stop
align => in key/value pairs