fix(runtime): stop forwarded named slot being added to nested default slot - #6815
Merged
Conversation
3 tasks
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
What is the current behavior?
GitHub Issue Number: #6770
A non-shadow slot optimisation piece of work I did (a while ago) uncovered a bug that was hidden by the (now removed)
experimentalSlotFixesflag; forwarded<slot name="thing">would be 'grabbed' by the nested component and added to it's default slotWhat is the new behavior?
Fixes #6770
We now more accurately detect incoming forwarded
<slot>nodes and make sure they're not automatically grabbed by the nested child's default slot.Tested against the linked repro
Note - this fix uncovered that stencil non-slot forwarding does not match native behaviour. V5 (via #6814) will correctly fix the overall forwarding behaviour - it was deemed to large a behaviour change for v4
Documentation
Does this introduce a breaking change?
Testing
Other information