[13.x] Revert "Correct Factory::configure @return to $this (#59963)"#60004
Merged
Conversation
This reverts commit 4727569.
jnoordsij
changed the title
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
This reverts commit 4727569 (#59963).
This change reverts the strict
$thisreturn tostatic, as returning new static instances (rather than (re-)configuring the existing one) is a common pattern for factories. For example, the documentation on factory callbacks illustrating the usage ofconfiguredoes this by callingafterMakingandafterCreating, which both return new static instances (rather than$this); see https://laravel.com/docs/13.x/eloquent-factories#factory-callbacks.Although the base implementation does indeed return
$this, imposing this on child implementations seems too restrictive to me given these considerations./cc @mosabbirrakib was there any reason in particular you needed the restricted type?