Can you elaborate your motivation for this change? Why do you need these annotations?

Also, please target the 6.1 branch.

Can you elaborate your motivation for this change? Why do you need these annotations?

For PHPStorm generic support.

The Psalm error looks related.

Can you elaborate your motivation for this change? Why do you need these annotations?

For PHPStorm generic support.

That's a very generic answer (no pun intended). Can you be more specific? How do the annotations help you? What would PhpStorm do differently if we added them to the codebase?

Can you elaborate your motivation for this change? Why do you need these annotations?

For PHPStorm generic support.

That's a very generic answer (no pun intended). Can you be more specific? How do the annotations help you? What would PhpStorm do differently if we added them to the codebase?

What are you mean, when you say "What would PhpStorm do differently if we added them to the codebase?". I think it's not about what PHPStorm do differently, it's about, when we can Annotate Event with Event<EntityOrModel> and then we can have intellisense with Storm.

when we can Annotate Event with Event<EntityOrModel> and then we can have intellisense with Storm.

That kind-of answers my question, I guess.

Would it make sense to add the template type for the subject to the workflow object as well?

when we can Annotate Event with Event<EntityOrModel> and then we can have intellisense with Storm.

That kind-of answers my question, I guess.

Would it make sense to add the template type for the subject to the workflow object as well?

We can add, but in workflow it will be do nothing because it's only be available in library.

To make psalm happy, I think you need to add @var TSubject in the phpdoc of the property, so that psalm considers the property as being of type TSubject rather than object

To make psalm happy, I think you need to add @var TSubject in the phpdoc of the property, so that psalm considers the property as being of type TSubject rather than object

You can check upper, I already do this, but @derrabus don't happy with it.

Well, we need to annotate both the constructor and the property, because the property inference of psalm is done based on the native argument type rather than the phpdoc type (and in that case, we need the more precise type TSubject).

Well, we need to annotate both the constructor and the property, because the property inference of psalm is done based on the native argument type rather than the phpdoc type (and in that case, we need the more precise type TSubject).

Added, fixed.

Well, we need to annotate both the constructor and the property, because the property inference of psalm is done based on the native argument type rather than the phpdoc type (and in that case, we need the more precise type TSubject).

I think the last commit is worked

@derrabus something strange is going on with my fork, i need to recreate, and we can close this and accept this #44702.