Add StreamWrapperInterface

[xepozz]

Description

I had to deal with https://www.php.net/manual/en/class.streamwrapper.php and faced with a problem that it's not a real class/interface reportedly documentation quote This is NOT a real class, only a prototype of how a class defining its own protocol should be..
But if you try to implement your own wrapper you may face with lots of errors like the method % does not exist. That's sad and I understand the base, but what do you think about adding just a common interface like I have made in the core? I'm sure that not only me did the same in their projects and this structured interface may have people to implement their own wrappers.
I didn't deep into all possible usage combinations of the wrappers, but it would be great to separate the one onto a few interfaces by ISP principle.

I may create the PR, but show me all places I need to change.

[KapitanOczywisty]

Methods in StreamWrapper are not required until called function is using them, and interfaces would make them required.

[Girgias]

This is a known issue with user streams (and streams in general).

Moreover, it would need to be split into a lot of smaller interfaces as not all streams need to seekable, castable, writeable, etc.

[github-actions]

There has not been any recent activity in this feature request. It will automatically be closed in 14 days if no further action is taken. Please see https://github.com/probot/stale#is-closing-stale-issues-really-a-good-idea to understand why we auto-close stale feature requests.

[xepozz]

Up

[github-actions]

There has not been any recent activity in this feature request. It will automatically be closed in 14 days if no further action is taken. Please see https://github.com/probot/stale#is-closing-stale-issues-really-a-good-idea to understand why we auto-close stale feature requests.

[xepozz]

up

[KapitanOczywisty]

up

@xepozz Unless you're working on RFC there is no point in keeping this issue open.