Question about LaratrustUserTrait::can

[KKSzymanowski]

UPDATE: Probably the same question for hasRole()

I was wondering, shouldn't $user->can([]) return true when user has no permissions?

Example:
We have some collection of Things. Every one of the Things requires one from a set of permissions to access. Some of them don't require any permissions to access.
When a User doesn't have any permissions, he should still access the Thing that requires no permissions.

With current algorithm, in previously mentioned case User is forbidden to do that, because we return $requireAll which is false.

[KKSzymanowski]

If my train of thought is correct, to fix it all that needs to be done is

if (is_array($permission)) {

    // --- BEGIN CHANGES ---
    if(empty($permissions)) {
        return true;
    }
    // --- END CHANGES ---

    foreach ($permission as $permName) {
        $hasPerm = $this->can($permName);

        if ($hasPerm && !$requireAll) {
            return true;
        } elseif (!$hasPerm && $requireAll) {
            return false;
        }
    }

    // If we've made it this far and $requireAll is FALSE, then NONE of the perms were found
    // If we've made it this far and $requireAll is TRUE, then ALL of the perms were found.
    // Return the value of $requireAll;
    return $requireAll;
}

in LaratrustUserTrait::can()

[santigarcor]

But why would you do something like this $user->can([]) ?

[KKSzymanowski]

I don't have a good example, but let's give it a try:
Suppose we have rooms with multiple doors. A person has access to a room when he has a key to at least one of its doors. Some rooms can have doors that can't be locked so everyone can access this room.
To find out if a person can access specific room, we would call:

$person->hasKey($room->requiredKeys);

If a room has no lockable doors, the $room->requiredKeys would return [] so we would in fact call $person->hasKey([]);.

Back to the reality: We can have a system which works as described above and a set of required permissions(or roles) can be empty so we would do user->can([])(or user->hasRole([])) in some of the cases.

I hope I'm talking sense.

[santigarcor]

@KKSzymanowski I got your point. I'll change that

[santigarcor]

a3fadd3 solves this