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.
* Redo Calculation of Color Tinting
Fix#3550. Some colors are specified in Excel by specifying a theme color to which a tint is applied. The original PHPExcel algorithm for doing this was developed by trial and error, and is good enough a lot of the time. However, for the issue at hand, the resulting color is detectably different from the calculation that Excel makes. Searching the web, I found https://gist.github.com/Mike-Honey/b36e651e9a7f1d2e1d60ce1c63b9b633 which comes much closer for the case in hand, and for all the other cases that I've looked at. That code depends on Python colorsys package; I have adapted the code from the Python gist and package into a new Php class. This doesn't agree perfectly with Excel. However, if each of the red, green, and blue components (each a value between 0 and 255 inclusive) agree within plus or minus 3 (arbitrary choice) of Excel's result, I think that is good enough.
I have added a new test member which reads from a spreadsheet with Xml altered by hand to set up several theme/tint cells. These tests use the plus-or-minus-3 criterion. They result in 100% code coverage of the new class.
Unsuprisingly, some existing tests failed with the new code. Issue2387Test reads a theme/tint font color, and is changed to use the plus-or-minus-3 criterion, comparing against the color as Excel shows it.
ColorChangeBrightness showed 9 failures with the new code. It consists of calculations not involving a spreadsheet. For that reason, I felt it was sufficient to just do an exact match test, changing the 9 old results for new results confirmed with the Python code. I also added one new test case, the one that kicked off this entire PR.
* Scrutinizer Being Stupid
It strikes again.
Mostly new tests, some code annotations, some minor code changes:
- RichText clone logic is wrong
- TextElement doesn't have object properties, doesn't need clone
Adrien Crivelli
oleibman
MarkBaker