In type fixes #44
Merged
In type fixes #44
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
iBotPeaches
approved these changes
Apr 23, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The
in/notInrules were typed incorrectly compared to what Laravel was type hinted as supporting.It is still typed a little oddly, any maybe wrong depending on how you interpret it. Laravel's internal rule will use func_get_args if not passed an array, but we do not do the same. I am not sure how we want to handle it, so for now I am just bringing the expected types in line with Laravel. We may want to use the same pattern, or add
...$valuesto come closer to supporting the default ofin($valueA, $valueB, ...).There were also some rules that were added before the docs site had been updated which were missing the links, this adds them and updates the text to match the docs.