-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5k
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 min-width support to Box DS component; Fix Blockaid Security Alert overflow issue; Fix missing Box width-max breakpoint styles #21317
Add min-width support to Box DS component; Fix Blockaid Security Alert overflow issue; Fix missing Box width-max breakpoint styles #21317
Conversation
CLA Signature Action: All authors have signed the CLA. You may need to manually re-run the blocking PR check if it doesn't pass in a few minutes. |
LGTM, looks like need to update another snapshot |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks really great! Because the Box
component is central to all of our component library components we are super sensitive to changes. Would it be possible to add some unit tests to ensure coverage is 100% for the minWidth prop? Then we can merge. It would also be great to add some documentation so other engineers can use this technique when they come across the issue but that could be another PR
Edit: I was expecting to see this prop not covered in jest coverage but it looks like it is so maybe coverage was the wrong term here. Nevertheless I think it would be great to add a unit test to test his prop
Co-authored-by: George Marshall <[email protected]> :) adding after syncing & realizing we created nearly the same code here
@georgewrmarshall good call! Thank you. Funny we had nearly the same code when we synced 🚀 also since you're here and I think you built a lot of this, it was really interesting following how the code for this system works! re: documenting the technique |
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ | |||
// Jest Snapshot v1, https://goo.gl/fbAQLP | |||
|
|||
exports[`ConfirmAddSuggestedNFT Component should match snapshot 1`] = ` | |||
{ | |||
Object { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Unsure of why Object has been added here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
hmm not sure but it caused the test to fail. I ran yarn test:unit:jest:watch --updateSnapshot
* earlier which I believe added this
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This was interesting because it was added by --updateSnapshot
. When I ran the test locally, the test wasn't failing with Object
.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM! Really nice work
not sure why it's failling in my PR rather than before this
not sure why yarn lint:fix added this
@@ -240,6 +240,7 @@ const ConfirmAddSuggestedNFT = () => { | |||
return ( | |||
<Box | |||
className="confirm-add-suggested-nft__nft-single" | |||
key={`confirm-add-suggested-nft__nft-single-${id}`} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
quite the stubborn tests 😅 running guess I'm doing these one at a time until I can unlock a better way |
Codecov ReportAll modified lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #21317 +/- ##
========================================
Coverage 68.61% 68.61%
========================================
Files 1020 1020
Lines 40929 40929
Branches 10920 10920
========================================
Hits 28080 28080
Misses 12849 12849
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Builds ready [f9ddc7c]
Page Load Metrics (1255 ± 404 ms)
Bundle size diffs
|
the tests are passing 🤘🏼 Thanks for the reviews! May we get 2 more reviews/approvals again plz? ty in advance |
Description
Manual testing steps
One way to test this:
example:
Screenshots/Recordings
Before
After
Related issues
Fixes #21316
Pre-merge author checklist
Pre-merge reviewer checklist