Implementing __set_state for CakeRoute

[jrbasso]

It helps the applications to cache the routes using var_export when possible.

[josegonzalez]

PHPCS failures, and a possible bs failure in PG.

[jrbasso]

PHPCS fixed. The issue with PG is happening for all builds on 2.6 derived branch.

[josegonzalez]

I blame @lorenzo :P

[lorenzo]

Why use var_export instead of serialize() ?

[jrbasso]

@lorenzo That's a good question. My brain was half-off and I copied the solution from FastRoute (https://github.com/nikic/FastRoute/blob/master/src/functions.php#L54-L58)

[lorenzo]

Ah well, I see one reason to do it like that. If you do it like fast route, the opcache will optimise that file, whereas doing it with serialize() will not allow that.

[jrbasso]

That's true. I haven't thought about the opcache, but makes sense. Also, probably if you have lots of routes it will generate a gigantic string and it will take a while for the php to parse it before build the objects.
Probably serialize would be a best solution if you have just few routes (which probably you don't need cache), or in cases you don't have access to write on the disk, or in cases where you want to share the cache between multiple machines.

[AD7six]

Maybe I'm caffeine deficient, but this test isn't testing setState. Whether the function CakeRoute::__set_state is defined or not this test will pass, it's not really testing anything at all.

The result of calling CakeRoute::__set_state is what should be being tested.

[jrbasso]

Are you caffeinated now? :)

The test uses var_export() which will dump the result like CakeRoute::__set_state(['key' => 'value']). So doing an eval() of it will trigger the code I implemented and generate a new object. PHPUnit assertEquals compare the object generate manually with the object generated from the CakeRoute::__set_state(), attribute by attribute.

That makes sense? I can make a simpler test just generating an object from calling the __set_state directly, but I thought this way would cover more the real usage of __set_state.

[AD7six]

Ah I see =).

I'd still prefer to see a more simple, explicit test, but otherwise a comment to explain what the test is doing would be a great help.

[markstory]

Having a test that doesn't use eval() would be nice 😄

[jrbasso]

Tests updated.

[markstory]

Looks good to me 👍

[AD7six]

👍