Add support for Drush hooks [#2065521]

Many of Drush's hooks are prefixed with "drush_hook" rather than just "hook_"—drush_hook_COMMAND_pre_validate(), for example—so their docblocks get flagged because the "Implements hook_foo()" regex doesn't support that variation. T'would be nice if it weren't so. :) Patch to follow.

Comment	File	Size	Author
#4	coder.coder-sniffer.2065521-4.patch	1.53 KB	traviscarden
#2	coder.coder-sniffer.2065521-2.patch	1.53 KB	traviscarden
#1	coder.coder-sniffer.2065521-1.patch	1.21 KB	traviscarden

Comments

Comment #1

traviscarden commented 14 August 2013 at 21:22

Assigned:	traviscarden	» Unassigned
Status:	Active	» Needs review

Status	File	Size
new	coder.coder-sniffer.2065521-1.patch	1.21 KB

I don't really know what's being done for automated testing for Coder Sniffer, so I took a stab what seemed obvious.

Comment #1.0

traviscarden commented 14 August 2013 at 21:22

Issue summary:

View changes

Updated issue summary.

Comment #2

traviscarden commented 3 January 2014 at 19:32

Issue summary:

View changes

Status	File	Size
new	coder.coder-sniffer.2065521-2.patch	1.53 KB

1 file was hidden/shown/deleted

Status	File	Size
hidden	coder.coder-sniffer.2065521-1.patch	1.21 KB

Reroll.

Comment #3

owen barton commented 14 January 2014 at 23:33

The patch is reversed, but otherwise I think this looks good.

If we wanted to get more precise we could check for drush hooks only in *.drush.inc files (splitting Drush functions out like this is a best practice, I feel), but that is pretty minor.

Comment #4

traviscarden commented 16 January 2014 at 04:50

Status	File	Size
new	coder.coder-sniffer.2065521-4.patch	1.53 KB

1 file was hidden/shown/deleted

Status	File	Size
hidden	coder.coder-sniffer.2065521-2.patch	1.53 KB

Oops! Thanks for the catch on the reversed patch, @Owen Barton. Here's a better one.

I agree it would be nice to restrict Drush hooks to *.drush.inc files, but that kind of feels like something for a new, separate sniff--maybe as a follow-up to this one?