feat(comp:desc): add Descriptions component

[danranVm]

PR Checklist

Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:

• The commit message follows our guidelines
• Tests for the changes have been added/updated or not needed
• Docs and demo have been added/updated or not needed

What is the current behavior?

What is the new behavior?

Other information

[idux-bot]

This preview will be available after the AzureCI is passed.

[cr-gpt]

the code review

1. The code looks good and seems to be properly indented.
2. All the variables are declared with a meaningful name, making the code easy to read and understand.
3. The code does not contain any syntax errors.
4. There are no unnecessary imports or variables declared that are not used.
5. There is no risk of security bugs, as there are no user input values used in the code.
6. The code is well organized and follows best practices.
7. There are no hard-coded values that could potentially cause issues.
8. The code is properly documented and commented, making it easier to read and understand.
9. The code is written in a way that it can be easily extended and modified as needed.
10. There are no performance issues, as the code is optimized for efficiency.

Suggestions:

1. It is recommended to use TypeScript instead of JavaScript.
2. We should add more tests for the code to ensure its correctness and reliability.
3. It is recommended to use static code analysis tools to detect potential bugs and vulnerabilities.
4. Add more log statements in the code to help with debugging.

[cr-gpt]

with the code review

1. Make sure that there are no syntax errors and all the variables have been declared correctly.
2. Check if the added properties (i.e. desc and form) are necessary.
3. Ensure that all the values being passed to the configuration object are valid.
4. Check if any of the existing parameters have been modified or removed.
5. Check for any security risks, such as SQL injection, XSS, etc.
6. Check if the code is following coding standards and conventions.
7. Verify if the code is optimized for performance and scalability.
8. Conduct a static analysis and review to identify any potential bugs.
9. Test the code with different scenarios to make sure it works as expected.
10. Review the comments in the code for clarity.

[cr-gpt]

with a brief review of this code patch:

This code patch looks to be updating the GlobalConfig interface in order to add a new DescConfig option. The code patch adds an import statement for type DescLabelAlign, DescLayout, and DescSize from the @idux/components/desc module. It also adds a DescConfig interface which includes the parameters col, colonless, labelAlign, layout, and size. Finally, it adds the DescConfig option to the GlobalConfig interface.

Overall, the code looks to be well written and follows good coding practices. There don't appear to be any bugs or risks present in this patch. In terms of improvements, it might be worth considering adding comments to explain what each of the parameters in the DescConfig interface do in more detail.

[cr-gpt]

by a basic code review:

1. The code patch looks valid, as it is properly indented and makes use of the correct syntax for importing files.
2. This patch adds an import statement for a new module (./desc/style/themes/default.less) to the existing list. Therefore, it should not introduce any bugs in the existing code.
3. No improvements can be suggested without knowing more about the code, such as the purpose of the imports.

[cr-gpt]

with a brief code review

1. Firstly, check the indentation and formatting of the code to make sure it is properly structured and easy to read.
2. Secondly, look for any potential bugs or errors that may be present in the code. For example, there may be typos or incorrect syntax that needs to be corrected. Additionally, there may be logical errors that could lead to unexpected results.
3. Lastly, look for areas of improvement in the code such as refactoring sections that can be optimized for better performance. This can include reducing the amount of duplicate code or using more efficient algorithms.

Overall, this code appears to be well formatted and have no obvious errors. It is also reasonably optimized for performance. However, it might be worth considering refactoring some sections to make them more maintainable.

[cr-gpt]

with a code review:

1. The patch looks to be properly formatted and organized.
2. The patch is using the correct syntax for YAML (Yet Another Markup Language).
3. The patch does not appear to contain any bugs, but it would be beneficial to test it out to make sure everything works as expected.
4. The patch could be improved by adding more descriptions to each section and by adding comments to explain the purpose of each section. This would make it easier to understand the code when it is read by other developers.
5. The patch also could benefit from a code linter to check for any syntax errors that may have been overlooked.

[cr-gpt]

code review

First, we need to check if the code follows the proper coding conventions and standards. For example, each line should be less than 80 characters, variable names should be meaningful and consistent, indentation should be used to increase readability, and end statements should be used.

Second, we need to check if the code is robust and secure. For example, we need to check if all inputs are validated properly, if there are any potential cross-site scripting vulnerabilities, if the code is vulnerable to SQL injection, etc.

Third, we need to examine the code for any bugs or potential errors. For example, we should check for incorrect logic, missing conditions, infinite loops, etc.

Finally, we need to review the code for any potential improvements or areas of optimization. For example, we should check for any unnecessary code or logic that can be simplified or removed, any inefficient algorithms or data structures that could be replaced with better alternatives, etc.

[cr-gpt]

with a brief code review.

The code patch above is written in YAML format, which is used to store data in a human-readable format. The code appears to add a new section to a document, containing both Chinese and English translations of the title, as well as a description of what the "col" object supports. There are no bugs or risks visible in this code, and the formatting looks correct. As an improvement suggestion, you may want to consider adding comments to the code to make it easier to read and understand.

[cr-gpt]

our code review.

First of all, we should check if the code syntax is correct and the indentation is correct. We can see that the syntax in this code patch is correct and there are no indentation errors.

Secondly, we should check if there are any logical errors or potential risks in the code. In this code patch, it seems that the logic is correct and there are no potential risks.

Lastly, we should check for any improvements that can be made. For example, the code does not appear to contain any data validation. It would be a good idea to add some form of data validation for the input fields to make sure that only valid data is accepted.

[cr-gpt]

the code review.

Firstly, there is no syntax errors in the code. The code looks simple and well-structured, so it should be straightforward to understand and debug. The comments are also clear and helpful in understanding the code.

For risk assessment, there is no risk identified in the code.

For improvement suggestion, if the code needs to be used in different languages, it might be beneficial to use localization feature to make sure the content can be displayed properly in different languages.

Overall, the code looks good and no bugs or issues were identified.

[cr-gpt]

the code review:

1. In the template section, make sure that all label names and values are specified correctly, and the spelling is correct.
2. Make sure that the type of the data being passed to the IxDesc component is valid and relevant.
3. In the script section, make sure that the HeaderProps type is defined correctly, and that the onSuffixClick property is assigned a valid callback function.
4. Check for any missing validations, such as input validation or type checking.
5. Test the code thoroughly to ensure that it is functioning properly.

[cr-gpt]

code review

1. The code is written in YAML language and it looks correct.
2. The code provides the title for both English and Chinese languages.
3. The comments provided are also clear and relevant.
4. It is good that the order is specified so that it can be sorted accordingly.

Suggestion:

1. The code can be made more organized by using indentation.
2. Since the comments are in English, it would be better if they can be written in both English and Chinese languages.

[cr-gpt]

with a brief code review.

Firstly, the code looks syntactically correct and well-structured. It uses Vue.js components to create a description layout with header and 6 columns. The components are used to display labels and corresponding information such as "策略名称" and "保障网络会议".

However, there are a few improvements that could be made to this code:

1. Make sure all labels and information are properly translated into the correct language.
2. Add descriptive comments to explain what each component is doing and why it is used.
3. Validate user input to ensure it is of the correct length and type.
4. Add appropriate error handling in case something goes wrong.
5. Add unit tests to ensure the code is working as expected.

[cr-gpt]

code review

1. Check if the code syntax is correct
2. Ensure that the code logic is correct
3. Check if the code follows the coding standards
4. Check for any potential security issues
5. Check for any potential performance issues
6. Check for any potential scalability issues
7. Check if the code is easy to maintain and debug
8. Check for any potential usability issues

[cr-gpt]

the code review

This code looks good overall. It is using the IxDesc component to format a description of a policy. The labelWidth and col props of the IxDescItem component appear to be correctly configured. The header and label properties are also correctly specified for each IxDescItem component.

The only thing to note is that the text content being displayed in the IxDescItem components could be too long. Depending on the size of the area that the IxDesc component is being used in, the text may need to be abbreviated or truncated in order to fit properly.

[cr-gpt]

with a brief introduction about the code patch, it seems like this is a code for a website or application, which probably adds single column data to the page or application.

The code is written in YAML and HTML, and the code looks valid according to the syntax.

Now, let's move on to the code review part.

First of all, I would suggest using more descriptive variable and function names, as they will make the code easier to understand and maintain. Also, make sure that the indentation is consistent throughout the code.

Second, I would also suggest adding comments to explain what each part of the code does, as this will make it easier for other developers to understand the code.

Third, the code should be tested thoroughly before deployment, to ensure that the code works as expected.

Finally, if there are any security risks in the code, such as SQL injection, Cross-site scripting, etc., they should be addressed as soon as possible.

I hope this helps. Please feel free to ask if you have any further questions.

[cr-gpt]

with the code review.

1. It would be good to check if all the attributes of the IxDesc component are used correctly.
2. Ensure that all the label names are consistent with their content and make sure that the label width is adequate.
3. Check if the data types are correct.
4. Test the code to make sure it works as expected.
5. It might be a good idea to add comments in your code to explain any complex logic or difficult to understand parts of your code.
6. Check if there are any security risks with the code, such as potential SQL injections or cross-site scripting attacks.
7. Ensure that the code is optimized for performance and scalability.
8. Make sure that the code conforms to coding conventions and standards.
9. Check if the code is maintainable and readable for other developers.
10. It would also be a good idea to run automated tests to check for any bugs.

[cr-gpt]

Code Review:

1. The code looks good and well organized.
2. The code is missing some comments to explain the purpose of the code.
3. The code could be improved by adding some validation checks to ensure that the data being passed in is valid.
4. The code should also have proper error handling in case something goes wrong.
5. It would be beneficial to add unit tests for the code to ensure proper functionality.

[cr-gpt]

the code review:

1. The code is well organized and easy to read
2. It should be noted that the type of the variable size should be defined, otherwise it may cause some unexpected errors.
   3.The value of sizes should be defined in the dataSource of IxRadioGroup, so that users can choose the size.
   4.It is recommended to add comments for each variable or function to make it easier for other developers to understand the code.

[cr-gpt]

the code review

Code Review:

1. The code patch looks to be valid and is properly formatted.
2. The DescProps, DescSlots, and DescMethods tables all have the same format and appear to be constructed correctly.
3. All of the table entries are empty, which is not ideal, as it makes it difficult to read and understand the purpose of the code patch.
4. It appears that the code patch is intended to provide a description for an IxDesc object, but without any information in the tables it is difficult to tell what the purpose of the IxDesc object is.
5. I suggest adding descriptions to each of the table entries so that the purpose of the code patch is clearer. Additionally, it would be helpful to add any Global Config or Remark fields if applicable.

[cr-gpt]

the code review

The code looks well-structured and the comments are helpful for better understanding of the code. I would suggest to add validations for the props values, such as type checks for the props like col, labelAlign, labelWidth etc. Also, use enums for props like layout and size to avoid incorrect values. Additionally, you can add defaultProps to provide default values for the props that don't have one. Those would help in improving the quality of the code.

[cr-gpt]

with the code review.

First, let's review the syntax of the code patch. The code patch looks valid and should compile without any errors.

Next, let's review the functionality of the code patch. It appears that the code patch is intended to add a comment describing usage scenarios for the code. This is a good idea as it will help other developers who use the code understand its purpose. However, it is important to ensure that the usage scenarios are accurate and up-to-date.

Finally, let's look at the risk of bugs in the code patch. Since the code patch is simply adding a comment, there is not a lot of risk of introducing bugs. However, there is a risk that the comment is inaccurate or outdated. To reduce this risk, it's important to make sure the comment is regularly updated to reflect any changes in the usage scenarios.

Overall, the code patch looks valid and should be able to be implemented without any issues. To reduce the risk of bugs and ensure accuracy, it's important to make sure the comment is regularly updated.

[cr-gpt]

the code review.

This code patch looks like it is to create a form or table with a title and content. The code patch includes two table columns, one for the title and one for the content.

There doesn't appear to be any bugs in the code, but there are some potential improvements that could be made. For example, the code could include more descriptive names for the columns, as well as additional columns if needed. Additionally, the code could be more flexible by allowing for different types of content, such as images or videos. Finally, the code should be properly commented to make it easier to understand and maintain.

[cr-gpt]

with a few basic things.

1. Is the code syntactically correct?
   Yes, the code appears to be syntactically correct.

2. Does the code follow any coding conventions or best practices?
   The code does not appear to follow any specific coding conventions or best practices.

3. Are there any potential bugs or errors in the code?
   It is hard to tell without more context, but there do not appear to be any obvious bugs or errors in the code.

4. Are there any areas that can be improved or refactored?
   It would be beneficial to add comments to the code to explain what each line of code is doing, as well as any assumptions that were made when writing the code. Additionally, it would also be beneficial to add some validation logic to ensure that the data being passed in is valid and meets the requirements of the application.

[cr-gpt]

with the code review
The patch seems to update the contents of a file, which is likely to be a markdown file. The category, type, order, title, subtitle and theme are all defined. The last line is some sort of placeholder, which indicates that something else needs to be added after this.

There doesn't seem to be any bug risk in the code patch and no improvements can be made as it seems to be complete and self sufficient.

[cr-gpt]

.

The code patch above is not complete and cannot be reviewed. A complete code patch must include the sections before and after the change, as well as the actual change itself. If you could provide a more complete code patch, we would be able to do an effective code review.

[cr-gpt]

the code review

1. Check for typos and syntax errors
2. Check for any logic inconsistencies or redundant code
3. Ensure that the code is properly commented and documented
4. Check that the code adheres to coding standards and best practices
5. Check for any security risks such as SQL injections, cross-site scripting, etc.
6. Make sure that the code is optimized for performance.
7. Check for any potential memory leaks or other performance issues.
8. Ensure that the code is compatible with all supported browsers.

[cr-gpt]

with a brief code review

1. The license header is included at the top of the file, which is a good practice in software development.

2. The code imports types from the src/types module, which is also a good practice as it helps to maintain code consistency and structure.

3. The code imports the Desc and DescItem components from the src module.

4. There is an aliases for the Desc and DescItem components, IxDesc and IxDescItem, to provide extra flexibility when using the components.

5. The code exports types from the src/types module, as well as the aliases for the two components.

Overall, the code looks to be well written and structured, with no obvious bugs or risks. As an improvement suggestion, it may be beneficial to add documentation comments to the imported types to help other developers understand their purpose.

[cr-gpt]

with the code review:

1. The code patch should begin with a comment explaining the purpose of the code, including what it is meant to accomplish. This helps developers understand the context and allows for easier debugging.

2. It is recommended to use descriptive variable names for each of the variables declared in this patch. This makes it easier for other developers to read and understand the code.

3. It is also recommended to use consistent naming conventions for each variable. For example, all variables related to item height should have the same prefix (e.g. "desc-item-height"). This improves readability and maintainability.

4. Finally, it is important to make sure that the code is properly indented and spaced out. This makes the code more readable and easier to debug.

[cr-gpt]

:

1. Firstly, ensure that the code syntax is correct and there are no typos by running a linter.

2. Secondly, check for any potential bugs in the code by running tests on different scenarios.

3. Thirdly, review any potential security risks such as SQL injections, XSS attacks, etc.

4. Lastly, review the code for any improvement suggestions such as better readability, faster execution time, etc.

[cr-gpt]

with the code review

1. The code imports two style dependencies- @idux/components/grid/style/themes/seer and @idux/components/header/style/themes/seer. It is good practice to make sure these dependencies are up-to-date and that their use is appropriate for the project.

2. The code then imports the file './seer.less'. It should be checked that this file exists and is correctly linked to the project.

3. The code does not contain any explicit bugs, but it is good practice to check for any potential bugs such as incorrect syntax or missing variables. This can be done through a static code analysis tool such as ESLint.

4. As the code imports styles, it should also be checked to ensure that the styles being imported are valid and appropriate for the project. For example, it might be necessary to check if the imported style is compatible with the project's other styles.

5. Finally, it is good practice to check if the code is optimized for performance. This can be done by checking if the imported styles are minified and if any unnecessary code has been included.

[cr-gpt]

with reviewing the code patch

1. The patch imports a file named 'default.variable.less' which is not included in the patch. This should be checked to ensure that the imported file is available and has the correct content.

2. The patch sets two variables, @desc-item-font-size-md and @desc-item-font-size-lg, to have the same value of var(--ix-font-size-sm). This could indicate an error in the code, and it should be checked to make sure that this is intentional.

3. The naming conventions used for the variables may not be clear, and it could be beneficial to rename them to something more descriptive.

4. Since the patch is only setting two variables, it would be useful to add comments to explain the purpose of the patch.

[cr-gpt]

:

A. It looks like there is a typo in the patch code, where colonless should be colon.

B. The type for control should be AbstractControl | string | number instead of string | number | AbstractControl.

C. The controlCol type should be ColProps | number instead of number | ColProps.

D. It would be better to add a description for the controlTooltipIcon property, so that users can understand what it does.

[cr-gpt]

the code review:

1. In the formProps and formItemProps, there is a redundant code block {type: Boolean, default: undefined}, which can be removed.
2. The typo in the definition of FormLayout type, inline should be 'inline'.
3. For the FormColType, it may be helpful to add more comments to explain the type definition.
4. It may also be beneficial to add more test cases to ensure the code stability.

[cr-gpt]

with the code review.

The patch looks good and is compliant with the coding standards. There are no obvious bugs in the code. One suggestion for improvement would be to add additional documentation to the code, such as explanatory comments, to help future developers understand the code. Additionally, it may be beneficial to add unit tests to test the functionality of the code.

[cr-gpt]

from the code review:

1. Syntax: The code patch looks correct and follows the correct syntax.
2. Bugs: There is no bug risk in the code patch.
3. Improvements: The background color for active menus was changed from var(--ix-background-color-medium) to var(--ix-background-color-light) which can provide better visibility and usability.

[cr-gpt]

with the code review

First, we want to make sure that the new import of './desc/style/themes/seer.less' is necessary and that it does not conflict with any of the existing imports. We should also check if the syntax is correct and that all the imported files are valid. Additionally, we should verify that the imported files have been thoroughly tested before being included in the code patch.

[cr-gpt]

code review

1. The code looks fine, however there is a lack of comments in the code which can make it difficult to understand the purpose of the lines added.
2. There should be a check if the prefix already exists or not, as it may lead to unexpected results.
3. The code should also be written in such a way that it is future proof and can handle any changes that might come up in the future.
4. The variable name should be descriptive enough so that it's easy to understand what it is used for.
5. Proper indentation should be used to ensure better readability of the code.
6. The code should be tested thoroughly before deploying it to production to ensure that no bugs are present in the code.

[cr-gpt]

with the code review

The code patch looks good. It is importing the default theme for the header component. This is done to make sure the component looks consistent with the other components in the application. No bugs or issues have been identified in this patch.

[cr-gpt]

with the code review:

1. The code looks good with no errors or bugs.
2. The code is importing the necessary components for the 'seer' theme.
3. It looks like the code is properly formatted and easy to read.
4. No improvement suggestions, as the code looks good.

[cr-gpt]

with a code review:

First, we can see that the patch being added is importing two new components from the @idux/components library - DescComponent and DescItemComponent. This will help to add more functionality to the code and should be a welcome addition.

Second, we can also see that the patch is adding declarations for these two components to the vue module. This is necessary in order for the code to compile correctly and it is good to see that this has been taken into consideration.

Finally, there are no obvious bugs or problems with the code patch so it looks like it should run without any issues. However, it would be a good idea to test the code after the patch has been applied to make sure that everything is working as expected.

[cr-gpt]

code review:

1. The code looks correct and is properly formatted. There are no syntax errors or typos.
2. The code adds two new variables to the style object, which should ensure that the tree select panel has a minimum and maximum width. This will help improve the usability of the search feature.
3. The code also adds two new variables to the style object for the tree select segment input, ensuring that it has a minimum width and text alignment. This should make it easier for users to read the data in the tree select segment.
4. The code adds two new variables to the style object for the date picker and date range picker segment inputs, ensuring that they have a minimum width and text alignment. This should make it easier for users to read the data in both of these types of segments.

Overall, the code looks correct and should improve the usability of the search feature.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1470 (d748b6d) into v1.5 (afeb80e) will decrease coverage by 0.11%.
The diff coverage is 98.81%.

❗ Current head d748b6d differs from pull request most recent head a323ab3. Consider uploading reports for the commit a323ab3 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             v1.5    #1470      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   92.89%   92.78%   -0.11%     
==========================================
  Files         327      331       +4     
  Lines       30399    30635     +236     
  Branches     3506     3524      +18     
==========================================
+ Hits        28238    28426     +188     
- Misses       2161     2209      +48     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
packages/components/desc/src/DescItem.tsx	96.38% <96.38%> (ø)
packages/components/config/src/defaultConfig.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
packages/components/config/src/seerConfig.ts	97.72% <100.00%> (+0.22%)	⬆️
packages/components/config/src/types.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
packages/components/desc/src/Desc.tsx	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
packages/components/desc/src/token.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
packages/components/desc/src/types.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
packages/components/form/src/types.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
packages/components/rate/src/Rate.tsx	76.50% <100.00%> (+0.14%)	⬆️
packages/components/rate/src/RateItem.tsx	94.28% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 5 more

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

[cr-gpt]

the code review

1. Check the code logic: Firstly, make sure that the code logic is correct and efficient. Check if there are any unnecessary or redundant codes.
2. Test the code: Secondly, run the code to see if there are any errors or bugs.
3. Check the variables: Thirdly, check if the variables have been defined correctly and are used in the right context.
4. Check the formatting: Fourthly, check if the formatting of the code is consistent and readable.
5. Check for security risks: Fifthly, check for any security risks such as SQL injection, XSS attacks etc.
6. Check for performance issues: Lastly, check for any performance issues such as memory leaks, inefficient queries etc.

[cr-gpt]

with the code review!

Code Review:

1. The code appears to be properly formatted and follows coding conventions.
2. There are no obvious syntax errors.
3. The code looks correct, following the necessary logic and producing the expected output.
4. The code is well commented so anyone can understand what it does.
5. The code is easy to read and maintain.
6. There is no unnecessary or redundant code.
7. The code is efficient and optimized for performance.
8. The code is secure and free from any potential vulnerabilities.

[cr-gpt]

the code review

1. Check for any errors/syntax mistakes in the code
2. Check if the code is following a specific coding style or not
3. Check if the variables are being declared and used correctly
4. Check if the logic of the code is correct
5. Check for redundant code
6. Check for unnecessary comments
7. Check for potential security risks
8. Check if the code is optimized for performance and scalability

[cr-gpt]

the code review:

1. The code looks syntactically correct and uses proper indentation.
2. The code is easy to read and understand.
3. The template is using the IxDesc and IxDescItem components, which could be helpful in displaying the information in a neat and organized manner.
4. There is no risk of bugs that are visible from the code.
5. As a suggestion, it would be better to have a 'background' attribute in the IxDesc component to customize the background color of the element.

[cr-gpt]

Code review:

Overall, this code patch looks good. However, there are a few areas that could be improved. First, there should be a comment at the beginning of each section, indicating what is being done in that section. This will make it easier for others to understand the code. Second, the code should be thoroughly tested before being merged into the main codebase. Third, the code should be formatted properly, with proper indentation and whitespace, to make it more readable. Finally, any potential performance issues should be addressed.

[cr-gpt]

with a brief review:

The code patch looks good. The code is well written and well organized. There is no bug risk in this patch since the code is syntactically correct.

However, there are some potential improvements that can be made. For example, adding comments to explain the purpose of each line of code would be helpful for future readers. Additionally, using more descriptive variable names could also make the code easier to read.

[cr-gpt]

review

Code review:

1. The code looks syntactically correct and should be able to compile without any errors.

2. The template tag encloses all of the content, so it should render properly.

3. The IxDesc and IxDescItem tags look like they are from a UI library, so it is important to make sure that the library has been properly included and is up-to-date.

4. The labelWidth attribute on IxDesc should match the width of the labels in IxDescItem in order to ensure a consistent layout.

5. The hard-coded values (e.g. “禁用”) should be replaced with variables in order to make the code more flexible and maintainable.

6. It is also important to consider accessibility when using UI elements like IxDesc, to ensure that the content is accessible to users with disabilities.

[cr-gpt]

Code review:

1. Variable naming should be more informative, such as sizeValue instead of size.
2. Sizes should be constants instead of array, like: const SIZES = { SM: 'sm', MD: 'md', LG: 'lg' }
3. <IxDescItem> should have the same attributes, like label and value.
4. The template should be more readable, for example, add a line break between <IxDesc> and <IxDescItem>.
5. Add types for all variables and parameters.
6. Make sure all strings are properly escaped.

[cr-gpt]

the review:

The code looks well written, there are no obvious bugs.

Some possible improvements include:

• Adding comments to help better explain the purpose of each section
• Improving the readability of the code by adding white space between lines and sections
• Adding more descriptive names for variables and functions to make them easier to understand

[cr-gpt]

the review

1. The code patch looks good, it is well organised and easy to read. The variables used are also descriptive and intuitive.
2. The code patch follows the CSS best practices, such as using meaningful class names and reset mixins.
3. There are no syntax errors or bugs in the code patch.
4. It is recommended to use media queries to make the code adaptive to different screen sizes.
5. As the code is written in Less, it is recommended to use mixins to simplify and reduce the code.