Feature request: Add switch to include/exclude parameters and return types from the diagram

[oliverklee]

At the moment, this code …

class A {}

class B {}

class C {
    private A $thing;

   public function checkAnotherThing(B $b): void {}
}

would lead to a diagram including the reference from C to B.

I'd love this to be configurable as for our usecase we only need references from properties (in addition to extends and implements).

[tasuku43]

Thanks again for another great suggestion, @oliverklee!

I agree, this would be a great option to have. Compared to #26, I expect this will be a much more straightforward change to implement.

I'll look into adding this in an upcoming update. Thanks!

[tasuku43]

@oliverklee

I’ve addressed this issue in v0.6.0!

You can now hide relationships using the --exclude-relationships option.
For more details, please refer to the README.md.

[oliverklee]

Thanks! 🙏 We'll give it a go.

[oliverklee]

I've just given the new feature a test ride.

First of all, thanks for implementing it!

We still have a use case that is not covered yet.

We have the classes Import, URL and OutputFormat.

Then we have this code:

class Import
{
    /**
     * @var URL
     */
    private $location;

    /**
     * @return non-empty-string
     */
    public function render(OutputFormat $outputFormat): string
    {
        // …
    }
}

For our class diagram, we need have the the Import -> URL dependency (from the property) included, but the Import -> OutputFormart dependency (from the method parameter) excluded. I currently don't seem to get this to work:

If I configure the call to have --exclude-relationships composition, the generated class diagram includes both dependencies, and if I configure it to have --exclude-relationships dependencies, it has none of them.

Am I doing something wrong, or is this another feature request of mine? :-)

[tasuku43]

@oliverklee
Thanks for the question. Currently, this tool doesn’t parse PHPDoc (doc comments) or include them in the Mermaid output. To capture your request accurately, could you open a new “Feature Request” issue with brief details on your goals, which doc elements you want included, and the preferred output style/granularity? :)