While we might never be able to have 100% of our code strict, we can at
the very least do it for all of our tests. This ensures that our tests
are using our API with the types as intended by the test author, and not
silently be cast to what our API requires.
* Fix Several Problems in a Very Complicated Spreadsheet
Fix#3679. That issue was opened for a problem which was already solved by PR #3659, however there were additional problems with the spreadsheet.
The main problem is that Data Validations and Conditional Styles can each be supplied in the Xml in either "external" or "internal" formats. The code for each to handle "external" assumes that each is the only "external" item on the worksheet in the Xml, but some of the worksheets in the sample spreadsheet provide both as "external" on some sheets. The code to fix this is verified against the supplied sample, however no formal test has been added for it. The sample is much too large and complicated to be added to the test suite - it takes several minutes to read, and even longer to write (`setPreCalculateFormulas(false)` is highly recommended). I will leave this ticket open for a few days to see if I can hand-craft a suitable test case, but I am not hopeful.
A second problem is that something in the Xlsx Reader `$xmlSheetNS->sheetData->row` loop breaks the selected cell for the worksheet. This is easily fixed and verified by eye (and with the supplied sample), but, again, no explicit test case is added.
A third problem is that drawings which are part of the supplied sample use `srcRect` tags in the Xml to effectively produce a cropped version of the image. This tag has hitherto been ignored. It is now supported in Xlsx Reader, Xlsx Writer, and Worksheet/BaseDrawing object. This is again verified with the supplied sample; unlike the other parts, it was easy to add a new formal test case for this part of the fix.
* Scrutinizer False Positives
oleibman
Adrien Crivelli