We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Multiple box-shadow values not transforming.
box-shadow
Apply two different xstyled box-shadows to an element:
box-shadow: shadows.1, shadows.2;
Expected output:
box-shadow: 0 0 0 1px blue, 1px 0 0 0 red;
What I'm seeing: box-shadow: shadows.1,shadows.2;
box-shadow: shadows.1,shadows.2;
This works: box-shadow: shadows.1;
box-shadow: shadows.1;
I feel this is easy to test without a reproduction. If you think otherwise, let me know.
## System: - OS: macOS 10.15.4 - CPU: (8) x64 Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-6920HQ CPU @ 2.90GHz - Memory: 47.07 MB / 16.00 GB - Shell: 3.2.57 - /bin/bash ## Binaries: - Node: 12.18.2 - ~/.nvm/versions/node/v12.18.2/bin/node - Yarn: 1.22.4 - /usr/local/bin/yarn - npm: 6.14.5 - ~/.nvm/versions/node/v12.18.2/bin/npm - Watchman: 4.9.0 - /usr/local/bin/watchman
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
feat(xstyled): support multiple values in box-shadow, text-shadow
e3e6100
Fixes #127
@gregberge wow! Thanks for being super responsive to this issue! :)
Sorry, something went wrong.
@gregberge sorry, but when can we expect to see this merged?
feat(xstyled): support multiple values in box-shadow, text-shadow (#128)
c8487fc
Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.
馃悰 Bug Report
Multiple
box-shadow
values not transforming.To Reproduce
Apply two different xstyled box-shadows to an element:
box-shadow: shadows.1, shadows.2;
Expected behavior
Expected output:
box-shadow: 0 0 0 1px blue, 1px 0 0 0 red;
What I'm seeing:
box-shadow: shadows.1,shadows.2;
This works:
box-shadow: shadows.1;
Link to repl or repo (highly encouraged)
I feel this is easy to test without a reproduction. If you think otherwise, let me know.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: