Fix PHP Warnings in PPCP Gateway #29
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
chrismccluskey
deleted the
refactor/nullsafe-operators-in-payment-gateways
branch
millerf
reviewed
Jan 17, 2025
| add_filter( 'sift_for_woocommerce_ppcp-gateway_cvv_result_code', fn( $value, $ppcp_data ) => $ppcp_data['order']?->purchase_units()[0]?->payments()?->authorizations()[0]?->fraud_processor_response()->cvv_code() ?? $value, 10, 2 ); | ||
| add_filter( 'sift_for_woocommerce_ppcp-gateway_verification_status', fn( $value, $ppcp_data ) => $ppcp_data['order']?->purchase_units()[0]?->payments()?->authorizations()[0]?->status()->name() ?? $value, 10, 2 ); | ||
| add_filter( 'sift_for_woocommerce_ppcp-gateway_decline_reason_code', fn( $value, $ppcp_data ) => $ppcp_data['order']?->purchase_units()[0]?->payments()?->authorizations()[0]?->to_array()['reason_code'] ?? $value, 10, 2 ); | ||
| add_filter( 'sift_for_woocommerce_ppcp-gateway_avs_result_code', fn( $value, $ppcp_data ) => select_first_payments_authorization( $ppcp_data['order'] )?->fraud_processor_response()->avs_code() ?? $value, 10, 2 ); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So
add_filter( 'sift_for_woocommerce_ppcp-gateway_avs_result_code', fn( $value, $ppcp_data ) => $ppcp_data['order']?->purchase_units()?[0]?->payments()?->authorizations()[0]?->fraud_processor_response()->avs_code() ?? $value
Would not work? I did not know...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That was my first thought, but no - it's a syntax error. There is an alternative, but I'm not sure if we want to use it as it's a bit harder to read. (context: p1737057534401999-slack-C6JKZ8MLK):
print_r( ( ( ( $ppcp_data['order'] ?? null )?->purchase_units() ?? [ null ] )[0]?->payments()?->authorizations() ?? [ null ] )[0]?->to_array()['reason_code'] ?? $value );or
print_r( ( ( ( $ppcp_data['order'] ?? null )?->purchase_units()[0] ?? null )?->payments()?->authorizations()[0] ?? null )?->to_array()['reason_code'] ?? $value );(replacing print_r with the filter and function)
|
Definitely even less readable. Let’s keep your original version.Maybe throw a unit test on your helper function for sanity?Le 17 janv. 2025 à 20:49, Chris McCluskey ***@***.***> a écrit :
@chrismccluskey commented on this pull request.
In src/inc/payment-gateways/ppcp-gateway.php:
add_filter( 'sift_for_woocommerce_ppcp-gateway_payment_method_details_from_order', __NAMESPACE__ . '\get_from_order', 10, 2 );
add_filter( 'sift_for_woocommerce_ppcp-gateway_charge_details_from_order', __NAMESPACE__ . '\get_from_order', 10, 2 );
add_filter( 'sift_for_woocommerce_ppcp-gateway_payment_type_string', fn( $value, $ppcp_gateway_payment_type ) => 'ppcp' === $ppcp_gateway_payment_type ? '$third_party_processor' : $value );
add_filter( 'sift_for_woocommerce_ppcp-gateway_card_last4', fn( $value, $ppcp_data ) => $ppcp_data['wc_order']?->get_meta_data( PayPalGateway::FRAUD_RESULT_META_KEY )['card_last_digits'] ?? $value, 10, 2 );
-add_filter( 'sift_for_woocommerce_ppcp-gateway_avs_result_code', fn( $value, $ppcp_data ) => $ppcp_data['order']?->purchase_units()[0]?->payments()?->authorizations()[0]?->fraud_processor_response()->avs_code() ?? $value, 10, 2 );
-add_filter( 'sift_for_woocommerce_ppcp-gateway_cvv_result_code', fn( $value, $ppcp_data ) => $ppcp_data['order']?->purchase_units()[0]?->payments()?->authorizations()[0]?->fraud_processor_response()->cvv_code() ?? $value, 10, 2 );
-add_filter( 'sift_for_woocommerce_ppcp-gateway_verification_status', fn( $value, $ppcp_data ) => $ppcp_data['order']?->purchase_units()[0]?->payments()?->authorizations()[0]?->status()->name() ?? $value, 10, 2 );
-add_filter( 'sift_for_woocommerce_ppcp-gateway_decline_reason_code', fn( $value, $ppcp_data ) => $ppcp_data['order']?->purchase_units()[0]?->payments()?->authorizations()[0]?->to_array()['reason_code'] ?? $value, 10, 2 );
+add_filter( 'sift_for_woocommerce_ppcp-gateway_avs_result_code', fn( $value, $ppcp_data ) => select_first_payments_authorization( $ppcp_data['order'] )?->fraud_processor_response()->avs_code() ?? $value, 10, 2 );
That was my first thought, but no - it's a syntax error. There is an alternative, but I'm not sure if we want to use it as it's a bit harder to read. (context: p1737057534401999-slack-C6JKZ8MLK):
print_r( ( ( ( $ppcp_data['order'] ?? null )?->purchase_units() ?? [ null ] )[0]?->payments()?->authorizations() ?? [ null ] )[0]?->to_array()['reason_code'] ?? $value );
or
print_r( ( ( ( $ppcp_data['order'] ?? null )?->purchase_units()[0] ?? null )?->payments()?->authorizations()[0] ?? null )?->to_array()['reason_code'] ?? $value );
(replacing print_r with the filter and function)
—Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Changes proposed in this Pull Request
Testing instructions
Alternatively, automated tests should cover this already.
Closes 602-gh-automattic/gold