New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Crossfade border-radius of "%" and "px" units #1416
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,100 @@ | ||
import { mixValues } from "../mix-values" | ||
|
||
describe("mixValues", () => { | ||
test("mixes borderRadius numbers", () => { | ||
const output = {} | ||
|
||
mixValues( | ||
output, | ||
{ borderTopLeftRadius: 10 }, | ||
{ borderTopLeftRadius: 20 }, | ||
0.5, | ||
false, | ||
false | ||
) | ||
|
||
expect(output).toEqual({ borderTopLeftRadius: 15 }) | ||
}) | ||
|
||
test("mixes borderRadius px", () => { | ||
const output = {} | ||
|
||
mixValues( | ||
output, | ||
{ borderTopLeftRadius: "10px" }, | ||
{ borderTopLeftRadius: "20px" }, | ||
0.5, | ||
false, | ||
false | ||
) | ||
|
||
expect(output).toEqual({ borderTopLeftRadius: 15 }) | ||
}) | ||
|
||
test("mixes borderRadius percentage", () => { | ||
const output = {} | ||
|
||
mixValues( | ||
output, | ||
{ borderTopLeftRadius: "10%" }, | ||
{ borderTopLeftRadius: "20%" }, | ||
0.5, | ||
false, | ||
false | ||
) | ||
|
||
expect(output).toEqual({ borderTopLeftRadius: "15%" }) | ||
}) | ||
|
||
test("mixes borderRadius percentage with 0", () => { | ||
const output = {} | ||
|
||
mixValues( | ||
output, | ||
{ borderTopLeftRadius: 0 }, | ||
{ borderTopLeftRadius: "20%" }, | ||
0.5, | ||
false, | ||
false | ||
) | ||
|
||
expect(output).toEqual({ borderTopLeftRadius: "10%" }) | ||
|
||
mixValues( | ||
output, | ||
{ borderTopLeftRadius: "20%" }, | ||
{ borderTopLeftRadius: 0 }, | ||
0.5, | ||
false, | ||
false | ||
) | ||
|
||
expect(output).toEqual({ borderTopLeftRadius: "10%" }) | ||
}) | ||
|
||
test("doesn't mix % with px", () => { | ||
const output = {} | ||
|
||
mixValues( | ||
output, | ||
{ borderTopLeftRadius: "10px" }, | ||
{ borderTopLeftRadius: "20%" }, | ||
0.5, | ||
false, | ||
false | ||
) | ||
|
||
expect(output).toEqual({ borderTopLeftRadius: "20%" }) | ||
|
||
mixValues( | ||
output, | ||
{ borderTopLeftRadius: "20%" }, | ||
{ borderTopLeftRadius: "10px" }, | ||
0.5, | ||
false, | ||
false | ||
) | ||
|
||
expect(output).toEqual({ borderTopLeftRadius: "10px" }) | ||
}) | ||
}) |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ export function pixelsToPercent(pixels: number, axis: Axis): number { | |
export const correctBorderRadius: ScaleCorrectorDefinition = { | ||
correct: (latest, node) => { | ||
if (!node.target) return latest | ||
|
||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This seems unnecessary |
||
/** | ||
* If latest is a string, if it's a percentage we can return immediately as it's | ||
* going to be stretched appropriately. Otherwise, if it's a pixel, convert it to a number. | ||
|
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm confused why we're not adding
percent.test(leadRadius) === percent.test(followRadius)
to this?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
But the test case seems to be still passing...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is essentially testing if they're different
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So if they're both false it's all good too
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah right! So in the purely hypothetical case that there would be a third string-based format, we would be fucked.
Let's add a comment about that then, because I think it's pretty confusing.