Add psalm annotations to ignored annotation name

[azjezz]

@pure annotation is mainly used by psalm to mark pure functions.

[greg0ire]

Hi! Please squash both commits together.

What is the reason for Psalm supporting @pure in addition to @psalm-pure? Can it really claim that annotation for itself, as opposed to PHPStan (for instance)?

[azjezz]

done.

This issue appears when using azjezz/psl library, and PSL has a CS rule that forbids Psalm specific annotations, in hopes that other tools in the future understand these ( e.g if PhpStan would to add pure function support, PSL wouldn't need to add a new annotation ) - ref: https://github.com/azjezz/psl/blob/1.8.x/src/Psl/Collection/Vector.php#L47

[malarzm]

PSL has a CS rule that forbids Psalm specific annotations

Maybe nitpicking, but linked file has other @psalm- annotations: @psalm-readonly and @psalm-mutation-free

[greg0ire]

This issue appears when using azjezz/psl library, and PSL has a CS rule that forbids Psalm specific annotations, in hopes that other tools in the future understand these ( e.g if PhpStan would to add pure function support, PSL wouldn't need to add a new annotation ) - ref: https://github.com/azjezz/psl/blob/1.8.x/src/Psl/Collection/Vector.php#L47

Ah yes, that library I should really try out someday 🙂

When I see the rest of the file, there are mostly annotations that are unlikely to be picked by any other tools. There are also annotations that are attributed to PhpStan but work with Psalm too

Maybe using tool names as consts is a bad idea because of this, in some cases? How about having

    private const StaticAnalysis = [
        // PhpStan, Psalm 
        'extends' => true,
        'implements' => true,
        'template' => true,
        'use' => true,

       // Psalm
        'pure' => true,
        'immutable' => true,
    ];

?

[azjezz]

Maybe nitpicking, but linked file has other @psalm- annotations: @psalm-readonly and @psalm-mutation-free

because @mutation-free and @readonly don't work with psalm IIRC.

[azjezz]

Maybe using tool names as consts is a bad idea because of this, in some cases? How about having

That sounds like a good idea 👍

[greg0ire]

Thanks @azjezz !