Skip to content
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

Allow for deeply nested color objects #2148

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Oct 25, 2020
Merged

Allow for deeply nested color objects #2148

merged 1 commit into from Oct 25, 2020

Conversation

innocenzi
Copy link
Contributor

@innocenzi innocenzi commented Aug 7, 2020

This PR enables the usage of deeply nested color objects, by making the flattenColorPalette function recursive.

Currently, the flattenColorPalette function can flatten a palette with a total of one nested object. Which means that if we want the following output:

.text-success { color: #285B45 }
.text-button-primary { color: #FFFFFF }
.text-button-primary-hover { color: #FFFFFF }
.text-button-primary-press { color: #FFFFFF }
.text-button-primary-muted { color: #FFFFFF }

We need to use the following color object:

{
  success: '#285B45',
  'button-primary': {
    DEFAULT: '#FFFFFF',
    hover: '#FFFFFF',
    press: '#FFFFFF',
    muted: '#FFFFFF',
  },
}

Instead of the more intuitive and practical following one:

{
  success: '#285B45',
  button: {
    primary: {
      DEFAULT: '#FFFFFF',
      hover: '#FFFFFF',
      press: '#FFFFFF',
      muted: '#FFFFFF',
    },
  },
}

Currently, that last color object would generate the following invalid CSS:

.text-success {
  color: #285B45
}

.text-button-primary color {
  DEFAULT: #FFFFFF;
  hover: #FFFFFF;
  press: #FFFFFF;
  muted: #FFFFFF
}

With this pull request, it would generate the expected CSS.


Note: this is actually out of scope, but this is the second time I try to contribute to Tailwind and I'm on a Windows machine. On Windows, line endings are a mess, so I added the endOfLine: auto rule to eslint, and I also created a .prettierrc file with the same rules (that would override any default IDE configuration).

Normally, that wouldn't change anything for you. If you don't actually want that, I can remove them from the PR, or create a separated one.

@adamwathan
Copy link
Member

Hey, think I'm good to merge this but don't really want to maintain two copies of our Prettier rules. Can we remove all that stuff from this PR and resolve any conflicts? Thanks!

@innocenzi
Copy link
Contributor Author

It's done, @adamwathan. 👍

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants