"value":"\n <p>When writing object-orientated code, particularly in PHP, you usually write method names using camel-case letters - such as:<\/p>\n\n<pre><code class=\"language-php\">public function doSomething(): void {\n \/\/ ...\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\n\n<p>This is also true when writing methods within a test class - only that the method name is prefixed with the word <code>test<\/code>:<\/p>\n\n<pre><code class=\"language-php\">public function testSomething(): void {\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\n\n<p>This is probably expected and complies with the PSR code style standards like PSR-12.<\/p>\n\n<p>Something that I've seen some PHP developers and some frameworks prefer is to write their test methods using snake-case letters and commonly removing the <code>test<\/code> prefix in favour of using an annotation:<\/p>\n\n<pre><code class=\"language-php\">\/** @test *\/\npublic function the_api_should_return_a_200_response_code_if_everything_is_ok(): void {\n \/\/ ...\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\n\n<p>This is something that I've done myself for a while, but now I'm starting to reconsider both options.<\/p>\n\n<p>Whilst it's more readable, especially for longer test names (which I like to write), it's not consistent with method names in non-test files or non-test methods in test files; it looks odd if I need to add another annotation (do I keep a single annotation on one line, or just those with multiple annotations on the separate lines), and to do this, I need to disable some code sniffer rules for code to pass the PHPCS checks.<\/p>\n\n<p>If I used camel-cased names, I wouldn't need the PHPCS overrides, the annotations would be simpler, and the code would be more consistent - so I think I'll try that way again in the next tests that I write and see how it feels.<\/p>\n\n<p>Which do you prefer, and which would you expect to see in your project?<\/p>\n\n ",
"format":"full_html",
"processed":"\n <p>When writing object-orientated code, particularly in PHP, you usually write method names using camel-case letters - such as:<\/p>\n\n<pre><code class=\"language-php\">public function doSomething(): void {\n \/\/ ...\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\n\n<p>This is also true when writing methods within a test class - only that the method name is prefixed with the word <code>test<\/code>:<\/p>\n\n<pre><code class=\"language-php\">public function testSomething(): void {\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\n\n<p>This is probably expected and complies with the PSR code style standards like PSR-12.<\/p>\n\n<p>Something that I've seen some PHP developers and some frameworks prefer is to write their test methods using snake-case letters and commonly removing the <code>test<\/code> prefix in favour of using an annotation:<\/p>\n\n<pre><code class=\"language-php\">\/** @test *\/\npublic function the_api_should_return_a_200_response_code_if_everything_is_ok(): void {\n \/\/ ...\n}\n<\/code><\/pre>\n\n<p>This is something that I've done myself for a while, but now I'm starting to reconsider both options.<\/p>\n\n<p>Whilst it's more readable, especially for longer test names (which I like to write), it's not consistent with method names in non-test files or non-test methods in test files; it looks odd if I need to add another annotation (do I keep a single annotation on one line, or just those with multiple annotations on the separate lines), and to do this, I need to disable some code sniffer rules for code to pass the PHPCS checks.<\/p>\n\n<p>If I used camel-cased names, I wouldn't need the PHPCS overrides, the annotations would be simpler, and the code would be more consistent - so I think I'll try that way again in the next tests that I write and see how it feels.<\/p>\n\n<p>Which do you prefer, and which would you expect to see in your project?<\/p>\n\n ",