feat(core): allow renaming of css template literals#973
Merged
Conversation
Anber
approved these changes
May 21, 2022
Collaborator
|
I've already done it in another branch, but don't know when it will be stable enough for merging, so lets use your implementation for a while. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
This allows us to have atomic css and non atomic css live in the same file. It does this by supporting renames of css imports, which exist for
styledbut don't actually exist forcsstoday. Eg:previously did not work, whereas now it will. It also allows renaming of the old API:
as well as having multiple renames coexist:
A few other things to note regarding backwards compatibility:
DetectStyledImportNametoDetectLinariaImportNameas it now detects all linaria API's. This is technically a breaking change in the API as it's renaming an export, but I think it's an ok thing to do on master while we're on v3 beta versions. It shouldn't be hard to migrate, but might be worth making a note of in the changelog.Test plan
Tested with snapshot tests