respect-validation/tests/unit/Rules/PropertyExistsTest.php
Henrique Moody d36572cc25
Split the "Property" rule
Currently, the Property rule has a third parameter that allows the
validation of the wrapped rule to be optional, meaning that the
validation will only happen if the property exists. That parameter makes
the rule harder to understand at times.

I'm splitting the Property rule into Property, PropertyExists, and
PropertyOptional. That way, it becomes apparent when someone wants only
to validate whether a property exists or if they will validate the value
of the property only when it exists.

I deliberately didn't create an abstract class because those rules are
different enough not to have an abstraction. In fact, I can see myself
deleting the AbstractRelated after I refactor the KeyNested rule.

Signed-off-by: Henrique Moody <henriquemoody@gmail.com>
2024-03-05 00:48:31 +01:00

41 lines
1.2 KiB
PHP

<?php
/*
* Copyright (c) Alexandre Gomes Gaigalas <alganet@gmail.com>
* SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
*/
declare(strict_types=1);
namespace Respect\Validation\Rules;
use PHPUnit\Framework\Attributes\CoversClass;
use PHPUnit\Framework\Attributes\DataProvider;
use PHPUnit\Framework\Attributes\Test;
use Respect\Validation\Test\TestCase;
#[CoversClass(PropertyExists::class)]
final class PropertyExistsTest extends TestCase
{
#[Test]
#[DataProvider('providerForScalarValues')]
public function itShouldAlwaysInvalidateNonObjectValues(mixed $input): void
{
self::assertInvalidInput(new PropertyExists('foo'), $input);
}
#[Test]
#[DataProvider('providerForObjectsWithExistingProperties')]
public function itShouldValidateExistingProperties(string $propertyName, object $object): void
{
self::assertValidInput(new PropertyExists($propertyName), $object);
}
#[Test]
#[DataProvider('providerForObjectsWithMissingProperties')]
public function itShouldInvalidateMissingProperties(string $propertyName, object $object): void
{
self::assertInvalidInput(new PropertyExists($propertyName), $object);
}
}