The Cache implementation in this package does not properly implement PSR-16

[stof]

In the PSR-16 interface (psr/simple-cache), the get method is supposed to return the cached value (same value than what is passed in set, not a PSR-6 CacheItem object.

The current implementation is a weird mix of PSR-6 and PSR-16.

[serbanghita]

@stof agree, I messed it up. I'm going to allocate some time to look into this and permanently fix this. Will you be available to review the PR by any chance?

[serbanghita]

@stof I started with PSR-6 and then I saw that PSR-16 exists

PSR-6 solves this problem already, but in a rather formal and verbose way for what the most simple use cases need. This simpler approach aims to build a standardized streamlined interface for common cases. It is independent of PSR-6 but has been designed to make compatibility with PSR-6 as straightforward as possible.

I think I should follow 100% of PSR-16 standard.
My confusion was with the PSR-16's CacheInterface::get(): mixed - this means that this is not meant to return a CacheItem but rather a raw value. Because prior to returning a value from cache, you have to check it's ttl

I believe my $cache_db implementation should have included a simple assoc array like:

array{cache_key:string, cache_value: mixed, exp_time: unixtimestamp} instead of array{cache_key:string, cache_value:CacheItem}

This is going to be a breaking change, so I think I need to go from 4.8.x to 5

[ArchBlood]

@stof I started with PSR-6 and then I saw that PSR-16 exists

PSR-6 solves this problem already, but in a rather formal and verbose way for what the most simple use cases need. This simpler approach aims to build a standardized streamlined interface for common cases. It is independent of PSR-6 but has been designed to make compatibility with PSR-6 as straightforward as possible.

I think I should follow 100% of PSR-16 standard. My confusion was with the PSR-16's CacheInterface::get(): mixed - this means that this is not meant to return a CacheItem but rather a raw value. Because prior to returning a value from cache, you have to check it's ttl

I believe my $cache_db implementation should have included a simple assoc array like:

array{cache_key:string, cache_value: mixed, exp_time: unixtimestamp} instead of array{cache_key:string, cache_value:CacheItem}

This is going to be a breaking change, so I think I need to go from 4.8.x to 5

I think it should be considered whether or not you want to switch from object based to key value based overall with the cache, key value is simple and doesn't use objects for individual cache entries whereas object is an instance of CacheItemInterface and offers a deferred saving feature.

If you plan on going pure PSR-16 then your $cache array would probably be better off like array<string, array{value: mixed, expires_at: int|null}> unless you want a list based approach instead of a direct index?