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

Add support for "at" #30

Open
Menardi opened this issue Sep 24, 2018 · 4 comments
Open

Add support for "at" #30

Menardi opened this issue Sep 24, 2018 · 4 comments

Comments

@Menardi
Copy link

Menardi commented Sep 24, 2018

Thanks for this polyfill, it's great and slots in perfectly. I notice the docs say that setting the centre point isn't supported. Is adding support for it likely?

Currently the use of at seems to be interpreted as a colour somehow. Gradients using the polyfill with a conic gradient which includes at do not fall back in the way I expect. I would expect that the gradient renders normally at the centre, but instead the behaviour is a bit different.

For example, the following gradient:

background: conic-gradient(at 50% 25%, yellow, lime, blue, violet, red);

It renders correctly natively in Chrome:
correct gradient

But renders like this in Firefox using the polyfill:
incorrect gradient

Additionally, if used with from, it throws a JS error, which prevents later conic gradients from rendering.

background: conic-gradient(from 90deg at 50% 25%, yellow, lime, blue, violet, red, yellow);

The error:

TypeError: prevStop.color.map is not a function (conic-gradient.js:184:12)
@LeaVerou
Copy link
Owner

I don't have the time to work on the polyfill, but I would be glad to review and merge PRs if anyone wants to do it!

@kumarharsh
Copy link
Contributor

@Menardi you can look into the closed PR #13 which had this fix for some pointers.

@Menardi
Copy link
Author

Menardi commented Sep 25, 2018

At a quick glance, that PR correctly renders the gradient as shown in the first post. 👍 However, since the branch is 3 years old now, it has diverged quite a bit from this version. It would need a refactor to get it working with the current version (including support for from).

@kumarharsh
Copy link
Contributor

Yeah, that's why I just pointed to it instead of fixing it myself 😛 The diversion is mostly due to a rewrite in es6 I believe, but the core structure should be the same since the plugin hasn't changed it's architecture much.

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants