PHP: Fixed an issue where a trait used in an anonymous class was defined as being used in a wrapper class

[troizet]

Fixed an issue where a trait used in an anonymous class was defined as being used in a wrapper class.

Example:

<?php

trait MyTrait
{
    abstract function doSomething();

    public function doNothing()
    {

    }
}

class MysClass
{
    public function getObject()
    {
        return new class() {

            public function getMyTraitAwareObject()
            {
                return new class() {
                    use MyTrait;

                    public function doSomething()
                    {

                    }
                };
            }
        };
    }
}

• Fixed the ImplementAbstractMethodsHintError hint for the above case [Anonymous class using a trait with asbtract method inside another class #8527]

before:

after:

• Fixed incorrect detection of the used trait in the navigator for the above case

before:

after:

• Fixed tests NavigatorTest
• Added new tests in NavigatorTest and ImplementAbstractMethodsHintErrorTest

---

^Add meaningful description above

Click to collapse/expand PR instructions

By opening a pull request you confirm that, unless explicitly stated otherwise, the changes -

• are all your own work, and you have the right to contribute them.
• are contributed solely under the terms and conditions of the Apache License 2.0 (see section 5 of the license for more information).

Please make sure (eg. git log) that all commits have a valid name and email address for you in the Author field.

If you're a first time contributor, see the Contributing guidelines for more information.

If you're a committer, please label the PR before pressing "Create pull request" so that the right test jobs can run.

PR approval and merge checklist:

1. Was this PR correctly labeled, did the right tests run? When did they run?
2. Is this PR squashed?
3. Are author name / email address correct? Are co-authors correctly listed? Do the commit messages need updates?
4. Does the PR title and description still fit after the Nth iteration? Is the description sufficient to appear in the release notes?

If this PR targets the delivery branch: don't merge. (full wiki article)

[tmysik]

LGTM but please, wait for @junichi11, if possible. Thank you!

[matthiasblaesing]

I looked through the changes and they look sane to me. The golden values for the new tests look sane. The updated golden files match what I would expect and also look good to me after the change.

Manual testing showed, that navigation works correctly.

My understanding is, that this works because the modification changes the UsedTraitsVisitor so that is does not recursively descent into the class structure, but only scans the toplevel block, which matches my understanding of the use statement.

This being reviewed now by two people and having been open for three months, I think it is time to merge.