[codex] Implement Epic 6 Blockly editor#17
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Summary
Implements Epic 6: the Blockly-powered block editor foundation for CodeQuest.
blockly@12.5.1and Vite dependency optimization.BlockEditor,RunButton, block registration, toolbox generation, and CodeQuest Blockly theme modules undersrc/editor/.src/tests so local worktree copies are not collected.docs/stories/E-06/.Notes
Manual browser smoke testing caught a Blockly 12 runtime issue: blocks cannot define both
colourandstyle. The registry now strips the content-packcolourfield when applying category styles so the toolbox categories and blocks render correctly.Validation
tsc --noEmitpassed under Node 22.RungeneratesmoveEast(), and workspace state serializes.Environment
The repo requires Node 22. The default shell Node 20 environment hit a jsdom ESM boundary, so full validation was run with Node
v22.22.2.