Php-cs-fixer: [7.4] Prevent "uninitialized" state

[ro0NL]

Given

class a {
  public ?int $int;
}

Would it be considerable to have a fixer that changes it to public ?int $int = null; (regardless of visibility and type). This potentially avoids a redundant constructor.

Ultimately the "uninitialized" state can be caught by static analysis tools. See e.g. https://github.com/vimeo/psalm/issues/1787

[Ocramius]

Context for this at https://3v4l.org/C8OBt:

<?php

class A
{
    public int $b;
    public ?int $c;
    public ?int $d = null;
}

var_dump((array) new A);

array(1) { ["d"]=> NULL }

[ro0NL]

@Taluu personally i like to opt-out from "uninitialized" state by default. I see no sanity in having to account for:

class a {
  public ?int $int;
}

var_dump((new a())->int);

Fatal error: Uncaught Error: Typed property a::$int must not be accessed before initialization

IMHO the language got it wrong here. But we accept and move on, so here we are.

[keradus]

to be honest i like the idea.
totally possible to create fixer like that.

can you try to do it, @ro0NL ?

[Taluu]

As I said on slack, to me it's not something that should be done. There is a different meaning between "my property is nullable", e.g "it can have a null value", but this doesn't mean "my property is nullable, so it should default to null". This has twi meaning, which is fixed with an intentional ?int $foo = null.

int $foo = null (which was the old way of declaring a nullable argument) is a heresy that should never has seen light IMO.

[ro0NL]

I understand the technical difference, but still i haven't found a reasonable sane answer on "why would i want it" or "why did we do this".

I'm considering the practical impact. One is free to use this fixer y/n of course :)

This is not about int $foo = null

This is about ?int $foo = null vs ?int $foo

[keradus]

we would need to handle this new rule vs no_null_property_initialization