fix(mrml-core): apply mj-attributes inside mj-include tags #377
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
Signed-off-by: Creston Bunch <creston@duolingo.com>
|
cc @jdrouet, let me know what you think; I'm not sure what steps to follow after opening this PR. |
|
I updated your PR and merged it. Closing this one 😉 |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I noticed a bug that seems to differ from the canonical MJML implementation. This PR implements one possible fix. I tried to make the change as minimally invasive as possible, but I'm open to ideas to clean this up if desired.
Bug description:
Any
<mj-attributes>tags loaded inside an<mj-include>tag are ignored. See the additional test case in the PR changes for an example.Change description:
We update
mj_head/render.rsto scan nested attributes inside<mj-include>children. To reduce repeated code, I refactored thefold()bodies into helper functions, but they are otherwise unchanged.I added a test case that fails on the current
mainbranch.Let me know what you think!