[Lunr.Locator] Core: Allow immutable class method usage

Review Request #867 — Created Sept. 12, 2022 and submitted Sept. 14, 2022, 4:49 p.m.

Information
Owner:	smillernl
Repository:	Lunr.Locator
Branch:	feature/methods/allow_immutable_class_methods
Bugs:
Depends On:
Reviewers
Groups:	lunr
People:

Description

Core: Allow immutable class method usage

Testing Done

CI in https://github.com/M2mobi/lunr.locator/pull/4

Issues

0
0
3
0
All Issues: 3

Description	From	Last Updated
I think attaching this info to the method that is called makes it nicer. i.e. something like 'methods' => [ ...	pprkut	Sept. 14, 2022, 3:24 p.m.
can go	pprkut	Sept. 14, 2022, 4:39 p.m.
assertNotSame?	pprkut	Sept. 14, 2022, 4:39 p.m.

Bugs:

-	HKG-7821

src/Lunr/Core/Tests/ConfigServiceLocatorSupportTest.php (Diff revision 1)

Show all issues

I think attaching this info to the method that is called makes it nicer. i.e. something like

'methods' => [
    [
        'name' => 'test',
        'params' => [ '!param1' ],
        'replace_instance' => TRUE
    ]
]


immutable as a keyword makes a bit less sense then, since the method is not immutable, that's why I picked replace_instance, but maybe you find something better :)

smillernl Sept. 14, 2022, 9:38 a.m.
```
How about return_self?
```

pprkut Sept. 14, 2022, 11:14 a.m.

I thought about that too, but it's not the same thing. If the class is immutable, then it's not returning self, but just an instance of the same class. And if it is returning self, the object wouldn't have to be immutable.

smillernl Sept. 14, 2022, 11:56 a.m.

returns_clone or returns_instance? I guess I'm mostly trying to make it clear that it's a method property, while replace_instance can be misunderstood as a goal.