Fix compoundSlots with boolean variants
#119
Merged
Conversation
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
zacharyhansen
approved these changes
Oct 26, 2023
jrgarciadev
approved these changes
Oct 27, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
PR #118 broke compoundSlots when using boolean variants. This PR fixes that by checking if the slot value is an array and then either doing
.includes()or full equality checking.I also updated the tests to do length checks on the class names to ensure that no extra class names slip in, as this was the issue that this PR fixes. I noticed in our usage of tailwind-variants with boolean variants that we were always getting the true value, even when false. The length checks should help prevent false positives.