Skip to content
New issue

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’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix: selector-max-universal #4263

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 13, 2019
Merged

fix: selector-max-universal #4263

merged 2 commits into from
Sep 13, 2019

Conversation

vankop
Copy link
Member

@vankop vankop commented Sep 8, 2019

Which issue, if any, is this issue related to?

related to #4232

Is there anything in the PR that needs further explanation?

Nothing. I have also updated some info in README

@hudochenkov
Copy link
Member

What exactly did you do here? I need a commit message, but couldn't figure out myself.

@vankop
Copy link
Member Author

vankop commented Sep 9, 2019

Sorry for poor description.

This PR relates to "bug" with mismatching warnings count. Currently stylelint report extra warning for :not(*) (could be any logical combination).
It happens, because of postcss-resolve-nested-selector parses :not(*) to [':not(*)', '*'], so this produce extra warning

@ntwb
Copy link
Member

ntwb commented Sep 9, 2019

How about:

fixed: Logical combinations :not and :has pseudo-classes in selector-max-universal are now evaluated separately.

@vankop
Copy link
Member Author

vankop commented Sep 9, 2019

How about:

fixed: Logical combinations :not and :has pseudo-classes in selector-max-universal are now evaluated separately.

there are :matches as well, all typos fixes up to you (I am not native speaker 😆)

@jeddy3 jeddy3 mentioned this pull request Sep 10, 2019
6 tasks
@hudochenkov hudochenkov merged commit cf87467 into master Sep 13, 2019
@hudochenkov hudochenkov deleted the fix-selector-max-universal branch September 13, 2019 17:51
@hudochenkov
Copy link
Member

  • Fixed: Logical combinations pseudo-classes in selector-max-universal are now evaluated separately (#4263).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants