Skip to content

fix: warn on implicit children snipett shadowing a prop #11633

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from
Closed

fix: warn on implicit children snipett shadowing a prop #11633

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

paoloricciuti
Copy link
Member

Svelte 5 rewrite

As pointed out by #11603 (comment) we can add an error also for implicit children snippet.

I've thrown the same error on the whole component but let me know if a new error is more appropriate.

Please note that the Svelte codebase is currently being rewritten for Svelte 5. Changes should target Svelte 5, which lives on the default branch (main).

If your PR concerns Svelte 4 (including updates to svelte.dev.docs), please ensure the base branch is svelte-4 and not main.

Before submitting the PR, please make sure you do the following

  • It's really useful if your PR references an issue where it is discussed ahead of time. In many cases, features are absent for a reason. For large changes, please create an RFC: https://github.com/sveltejs/rfcs
  • Prefix your PR title with feat:, fix:, chore:, or docs:.
  • This message body should clearly illustrate what problems it solves.
  • Ideally, include a test that fails without this PR but passes with it.

Tests and linting

  • Run the tests with pnpm test and lint the project with pnpm lint

@changeset-bot changeset-bot
Copy link

changeset-bot bot commented May 15, 2024 •
edited
Loading

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 3fa48fb

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Name Type
svelte Patch

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

@brunnerh
Copy link
Member

Nitpick: A separate message might be a bit better for those not yet too familiar with how snippets work.

Something along the lines of:

The component content is implicitly passed as a children snippet which conflicts with the children prop set as an attribute.

(If these are not warnings but errors, the wording in general could be changed from "shadowing" to "conflict" because shadowing will de-facto not happen.)

@paoloricciuti
Copy link
Member Author

Nitpick: A separate message might be a bit better for those not yet too familiar with how snippets work.

Something along the lines of:

The component content is implicitly passed as a children snippet which conflicts with the children prop set as an attribute.

Yeah that was my thinking as well

(If these are not warnings but errors, the wording in general could be changed from "shadowing" to "conflict" because shadowing will de-facto not happen.)

Agree to this too...fixing it now!

@dummdidumm
Copy link
Member

I don't think we can land this until legacy code is gone, there's #10800 which is somewhat related/competing to this. TLDR children prop + default slot content is a rare but valid use case in Svelte 4 land.

@paoloricciuti
Copy link
Member Author

I don't think we can land this until legacy code is gone, there's #10800 which is somewhat related/competing to this. TLDR children prop + default slot content is a rare but valid use case in Svelte 4 land.

Maybe we can error only in runes mode?

@dummdidumm
Copy link
Member

You can't know whether the component you're consuming is a legacy component or not. The consumer component mode is irrelevant in this case.

@paoloricciuti
Copy link
Member Author

You can't know whether the component you're consuming is a legacy component or not. The consumer component mode is irrelevant in this case.

Oh right...well it was good until it lasted lol. Do we close this?

@Rich-Harris
Copy link
Member

I think we have to, yeah. Thanks anyway!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@paoloricciuti @brunnerh @dummdidumm @Rich-Harris