fix: Block labels should not use custom input labels (nested inputs)#9916
Merged
mikeharv merged 2 commits intoMay 21, 2026
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
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
The basics
The details
Resolves
Builds on #9886 to ensure that block labels do not use custom input labels if the block contains nested value blocks, etc. This change also ensures commas are consistent between inputs for nested value blocks, etc.
Proposed Changes
Push
useCustomLabelsparam through to the inputgetLabelmethod.Reason for Changes
Current behaviour: Nested block has focus, block label is as expected:
Current behaviour: Parent block has focus, block label for nested block is using custom input labels:
This changes fixes scenario 2, so that the output is now:
This seems to be missing a comma between "0 y", but will investigate this separately. Update: I pushed a change to fix this as well since it is trivial.
Test Coverage
None added.
Documentation
No
Additional Information
N/A