Components: Add types to Draggable#29792
Merged
Merged
Conversation
75 tasks
|
Size Change: +2 B (0%) Total Size: 1.41 MB
ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
ntsekouras
reviewed
Mar 12, 2021
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That seems like an existing bug. Wondering how/what it does.. Looking at: https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg/pull/26897/files
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm also not sure about this one. Any suggestions on how to test its impact?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry, I should have mentioned this in the PR description, I totally glossed over that this was a fix.
Not sure how to measure its impact, but theoretically any onDragEnd event that was supposed to be fired was not being fired due to the lack of an onDragOver. That sounds pretty bad in the context of this component 😬
I did some digging and it doens't look like Draggable is even used in the Gutenberg codebase so there's no way to test it here 😕
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe if we ping the author of the original code?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ellatrix As you did the original refactor to a function component, do you mind chiming in on this? Is there a good way to test the result of this bug fix?
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is used:
Drag and drop is hard to test, but manually by testing the block drag handle.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, I don't know how I missed those usages!
Luckily, this bug would never have affected those two usages. One does not use the onDrag* events passed to Draggable at all and the other passes both onDragOver and onDragEnd meaning that this bug wouldn't have affected it.
Block dragging continues to work as expected.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's good. No tests required imo.
tyxla
reviewed
Mar 12, 2021
tyxla
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looking good 👍 The null change also looks safe. Left a couple of questions.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm also not sure about this one. Any suggestions on how to test its impact?
b0248c2 to
7c327c2
Compare
7c327c2 to
2722dd5
Compare
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
4 participants
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.
Description
Adds types to the
Draggablecomponent. No runtime changes except to change the ref from defaulting toundefinedto default tonull. This should have no real effect as the null checks were just checking for flasy-ness rather thanundefinedspecifically.Part of #18838
How has this been tested?
Storybook (
npm run storybook:dev) and the Draggable story continues to work as expected. Again, there are no runtime changes except the minor one I mention above so the main thing is that type checks pass 🙂Types of changes
Non-breaking change.
Checklist: