-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 929
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 ignoreSelectors: [] to selector-no-vendor-prefix #3748
Add ignoreSelectors: [] to selector-no-vendor-prefix #3748
Conversation
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.
@Bilie Thanks!
I've made a suggestion to use the optionsMatches
util, which I think is better suited for these types of conditionals.
@@ -36,6 +49,14 @@ const rule = function(actual) { | |||
parseSelector(selector, result, rule, selectorTree => { | |||
selectorTree.walkPseudos(pseudoNode => { | |||
if (isAutoprefixable.selector(pseudoNode.value)) { | |||
if ( |
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.
I believe optionsMatches
will suffice here, like so.
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.
There's an odd appveyor test failing.
|
||
reject: [ | ||
{ | ||
code: "input:-ms-input-placeholder { color: pink; }", |
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.
I think this might need to a pseudo-element to appease appveyor: input::-ms-input-placeholder
.
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.
@Bilie Thanks for making the change. It looks like appveyor is happy now.
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.
@Bilie My bad, I mistitled the original issue.
This option should be ignoreSelectors
and not ignoreProperties
. I've requested the changes as suggestions to make it easier for you.
Co-Authored-By: Bilie <bilianavaleva@gmail.com>
Co-Authored-By: Bilie <bilianavaleva@gmail.com>
Co-Authored-By: Bilie <bilianavaleva@gmail.com>
Co-Authored-By: Bilie <bilianavaleva@gmail.com>
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.
@Bilie Thanks for making the changes! LGTM.
Closes #3197
No, it's self explanatory.