[11.x] Add Request::fluent method

[stevebauman]

Description

This PR adds a new fluent() method to the Illuminate\Http\Request class.

Similar to the Request::collect method, being able to transform the request input to a Fluent instance helps in being able to transport the input data around your application (such as an action or a queued job) and provides you null-safe access instead of using an array.

Usage

Consider an action that consumes a Fluent instance to access request data safely that may be nullable, while also being portable for easy testing without having to provide a request instance:

use App\Actions\CreateComment;

class CommentController extends Controller
{
    public function store(CommentRequest $request)
    {
        $comment = (new CreateComment)->handle(
            $request->fluent()
        );

        return response($comment);
    }
}

class StoreComment extends QueuedJob
{
    public function __construct(
        public Fluent $data
    ) {}

    public function handle(): Comment
    {
        return Comment::create([
            'title' => $this->data->title,
            'body' => $this->data->body,
            // ...
        ]);
    }
}

[GavG]

Nice 👌 what're your thoughts on a FluentRequest class that can be used to type hint the controller function param to allow auto-injection of the fluent wrapped version, avoiding need for the manual call to ->fluent()?

Easy enough to write in userland I guess, but a nicety I'd probably never get round to in my projects.

[stevebauman]

@GavG I'm not sure if that'd be easily do-able, and/or worth the pay-off, imo. How would it work?

[GavG]

@GavG I'm not sure if that'd be easily do-able, and/or worth the pay-off, imo. How would it work?

Having had a look through, I'd agree, it's not worth the pay off.

It could be done when resolving controller method params, but it wouldn't be especially clean. Users who wanted to could, I think, use a custom contextual cast.

So I retract my idea, for the sake of saving one line of code 😂

[stevebauman]

@GavG haha okay sounds good! Appreciate the discussion though.