Closes #7119

[Khadreal]

Description

Fixes #7119
Nothing impacts users.

Type of change

• Enhancement (non-breaking change which improves an existing functionality).

Detailed scenario

n/a

Technical description

Documentation

This pull request introduces several changes to enhance PHPStan integration and adds a new custom rule for validating @param tags in docblocks. The most important changes include adding a new script to reset the PHPStan baseline, updating the PHPStan configuration files, and implementing a custom PHPStan rule.

Enhancements to PHPStan integration:

• composer.json: Added a new script run-stan-reset-baseline to reset the PHPStan baseline.
• phpstan-baseline.neon: Added baseline configurations to ignore specific errors in certain files.
• phpstan.neon.dist: Updated the parameters section to include a new directory and added the custom rule WP_Rocket\Tests\phpstan\Rules\ApplyFiltersTypedDynamicFunctionReturnTypeExtension. [1] [2]

Implementation of a custom PHPStan rule:

• tests/phpstan/Rules/ApplyFiltersTypedDynamicFunctionReturnTypeExtension.php: Added a new custom rule to validate @param tags in docblocks for the wpm_apply_filters_typed function.

Mandatory Checklist

Code validation

• I validated all the Acceptance Criteria. If possible, provide screenshots or videos.
• I triggered all changed lines of code at least once without new errors/warnings/notices.
• I implemented built-in tests to cover the new/changed code.

Code style

• I wrote a self-explanatory code about what it does.
• I protected entry points against unexpected inputs.
• I did not introduce unnecessary complexity.

[codacy-production]

Coverage summary from Codacy

See diff coverage on Codacy

Coverage variation	Diff coverage
Report missing for dd33f7b1	✅ ∅ (target: 50.00%)

Coverage variation details

	Coverable lines	Covered lines	Coverage
Common ancestor commit (dd33f7b)	Report Missing	Report Missing	Report Missing
Head commit (97c1c8d)	38228	16731	43.77%

Coverage variation is the difference between the coverage for the head and common ancestor commits of the pull request branch: <coverage of head commit> - <coverage of common ancestor commit>

Diff coverage details

	Coverable lines	Covered lines	Diff coverage
Pull request (#7132)	0	0	∅ (not applicable)

Diff coverage is the percentage of lines that are covered by tests out of the coverable lines that the pull request added or modified: <covered lines added or modified>/<coverable lines added or modified> * 100%

See your quality gate settings    Change summary preferences

_{Codacy stopped sending the deprecated coverage status on June 5th, 2024. Learn more}

Footnotes

1. Codacy didn't receive coverage data for the commit, or there was an error processing the received data. Check your integration for errors and validate that your coverage setup is correct. ↩

[Miraeld]

As we are getting some complexities in the test of this rules, we've decided to seperate the rule and the test in two issues.

This is why I'm deleting the beginning of test implementation from this PR, to create a new issue for it.

To make it short, the problem that is happening in here is that the custom rules is able to parse docblocks while running for real code. But in the tests, it's detecting the docblock but considering them empty, and we can't explain it at the moment.

As we don't want to block any development made, we've decided to proceed with manual test at first, and implement tests in a second step.

[remyperona]

Did we validate that all possible errors are correctly covered?

[Miraeld]

@remyperona as I said in the comment, unit tests are a bit tricky with the docblock.
If you feel like you could add them please feel free. Otherwise I will wait @CrochetFeve0251 to be available to take a look at them. That's why I originated created another issue.
I tried to manually test everything I could think off, and it was working tho.

[remyperona]

If we did manual testing for the possible cases, sounds good.