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

padding -> spacing utilities #4

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 1, 2017

Conversation

mariowhowrites
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@reinink reinink merged commit ad34c40 into tailwindlabs:master Nov 1, 2017
@reinink
Copy link
Member

reinink commented Nov 1, 2017

Sweet, thanks @Mvega3! 💯

DCzajkowski pushed a commit to DCzajkowski/tailwindcss that referenced this pull request Jul 23, 2019
brandonmcconnell pushed a commit to brandonmcconnell/tailwindcss that referenced this pull request Jan 13, 2023
…lass-variants

Add 'not-' variants for all pseudo-class variants
RobinMalfait added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 20, 2024
A bit of a vague commit message, but this does a lot of things. I could
split it up, but not sure if it's worth it. Instead, let's talk about
it.

While working on keeping track of comment locations I was running into
some issues. Not the end of the world, but we could make things better.

Paired with Jordan on this to rework the algorithm. The idea is that we
now do multiple passes which is technically slower, but now we can work
on separate units of work.

- Step #1 is to prepare the at-rule. This means that rules with multiple
  selectors will be split in multiple nodes with the their own single
  selector.
- Step #2 is to collect all the classes we want to create an `@utility`
  for.
- Step #3 is to create a clone of the main `@layer utilities` for all
  the non-`@utility` leftover nodes (E.g.: rules with element and ID
  selectors).
- Step #4 is to create a clone of the main `@layer utilities` node for
  every single `@utility <name>` we want to create.
- Step #5 is to go over every clone, and eliminate everything that is
  not part of the `@utility` in question. So we can remove siblings
  (except for comments near it) and go up the chain.
- Step #6 is now to go over the initial `@layer utilities` clone we set
  aside, and remove everything that's not part of any of the clones.
- Step #7 is cleanup work, where empty nodes are removed, and rules with
  a selector of `&` are replaced by its children. This is done in a
  depth-first traversal instead of breadth first.

Co-authored-by: Jordan Pittman <[email protected]>
RobinMalfait added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 20, 2024
A bit of a vague commit message, but this does a lot of things. I could
split it up, but not sure if it's worth it. Instead, let's talk about
it.

While working on keeping track of comment locations I was running into
some issues. Not the end of the world, but we could make things better.

Paired with Jordan on this to rework the algorithm. The idea is that we
now do multiple passes which is technically slower, but now we can work
on separate units of work.

- Step #1 is to prepare the at-rule. This means that rules with multiple
  selectors will be split in multiple nodes with the their own single
  selector.
- Step #2 is to collect all the classes we want to create an `@utility`
  for.
- Step #3 is to create a clone of the main `@layer utilities` for all
  the non-`@utility` leftover nodes (E.g.: rules with element and ID
  selectors).
- Step #4 is to create a clone of the main `@layer utilities` node for
  every single `@utility <name>` we want to create.
- Step #5 is to go over every clone, and eliminate everything that is
  not part of the `@utility` in question. So we can remove siblings
  (except for comments near it) and go up the chain.
- Step #6 is now to go over the initial `@layer utilities` clone we set
  aside, and remove everything that's not part of any of the clones.
- Step #7 is cleanup work, where empty nodes are removed, and rules with
  a selector of `&` are replaced by its children. This is done in a
  depth-first traversal instead of breadth first.

Co-authored-by: Jordan Pittman <[email protected]>
RobinMalfait added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 21, 2024
A bit of a vague commit message, but this does a lot of things. I could
split it up, but not sure if it's worth it. Instead, let's talk about
it.

While working on keeping track of comment locations I was running into
some issues. Not the end of the world, but we could make things better.

Paired with Jordan on this to rework the algorithm. The idea is that we
now do multiple passes which is technically slower, but now we can work
on separate units of work.

- Step #1 is to prepare the at-rule. This means that rules with multiple
  selectors will be split in multiple nodes with the their own single
  selector.
- Step #2 is to collect all the classes we want to create an `@utility`
  for.
- Step #3 is to create a clone of the main `@layer utilities` for all
  the non-`@utility` leftover nodes (E.g.: rules with element and ID
  selectors).
- Step #4 is to create a clone of the main `@layer utilities` node for
  every single `@utility <name>` we want to create.
- Step #5 is to go over every clone, and eliminate everything that is
  not part of the `@utility` in question. So we can remove siblings
  (except for comments near it) and go up the chain.
- Step #6 is now to go over the initial `@layer utilities` clone we set
  aside, and remove everything that's not part of any of the clones.
- Step #7 is cleanup work, where empty nodes are removed, and rules with
  a selector of `&` are replaced by its children. This is done in a
  depth-first traversal instead of breadth first.

Co-authored-by: Jordan Pittman <[email protected]>
RobinMalfait added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 23, 2024
A bit of a vague commit message, but this does a lot of things. I could
split it up, but not sure if it's worth it. Instead, let's talk about
it.

While working on keeping track of comment locations I was running into
some issues. Not the end of the world, but we could make things better.

Paired with Jordan on this to rework the algorithm. The idea is that we
now do multiple passes which is technically slower, but now we can work
on separate units of work.

- Step #1 is to prepare the at-rule. This means that rules with multiple
  selectors will be split in multiple nodes with the their own single
  selector.
- Step #2 is to collect all the classes we want to create an `@utility`
  for.
- Step #3 is to create a clone of the main `@layer utilities` for all
  the non-`@utility` leftover nodes (E.g.: rules with element and ID
  selectors).
- Step #4 is to create a clone of the main `@layer utilities` node for
  every single `@utility <name>` we want to create.
- Step #5 is to go over every clone, and eliminate everything that is
  not part of the `@utility` in question. So we can remove siblings
  (except for comments near it) and go up the chain.
- Step #6 is now to go over the initial `@layer utilities` clone we set
  aside, and remove everything that's not part of any of the clones.
- Step #7 is cleanup work, where empty nodes are removed, and rules with
  a selector of `&` are replaced by its children. This is done in a
  depth-first traversal instead of breadth first.

Co-authored-by: Jordan Pittman <[email protected]>
RobinMalfait added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 23, 2024
A bit of a vague commit message, but this does a lot of things. I could
split it up, but not sure if it's worth it. Instead, let's talk about
it.

While working on keeping track of comment locations I was running into
some issues. Not the end of the world, but we could make things better.

Paired with Jordan on this to rework the algorithm. The idea is that we
now do multiple passes which is technically slower, but now we can work
on separate units of work.

- Step #1 is to prepare the at-rule. This means that rules with multiple
  selectors will be split in multiple nodes with the their own single
  selector.
- Step #2 is to collect all the classes we want to create an `@utility`
  for.
- Step #3 is to create a clone of the main `@layer utilities` for all
  the non-`@utility` leftover nodes (E.g.: rules with element and ID
  selectors).
- Step #4 is to create a clone of the main `@layer utilities` node for
  every single `@utility <name>` we want to create.
- Step #5 is to go over every clone, and eliminate everything that is
  not part of the `@utility` in question. So we can remove siblings
  (except for comments near it) and go up the chain.
- Step #6 is now to go over the initial `@layer utilities` clone we set
  aside, and remove everything that's not part of any of the clones.
- Step #7 is cleanup work, where empty nodes are removed, and rules with
  a selector of `&` are replaced by its children. This is done in a
  depth-first traversal instead of breadth first.

Co-authored-by: Jordan Pittman <[email protected]>
RobinMalfait added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 23, 2024
A bit of a vague commit message, but this does a lot of things. I could
split it up, but not sure if it's worth it. Instead, let's talk about
it.

While working on keeping track of comment locations I was running into
some issues. Not the end of the world, but we could make things better.

Paired with Jordan on this to rework the algorithm. The idea is that we
now do multiple passes which is technically slower, but now we can work
on separate units of work.

- Step #1 is to prepare the at-rule. This means that rules with multiple
  selectors will be split in multiple nodes with the their own single
  selector.
- Step #2 is to collect all the classes we want to create an `@utility`
  for.
- Step #3 is to create a clone of the main `@layer utilities` for all
  the non-`@utility` leftover nodes (E.g.: rules with element and ID
  selectors).
- Step #4 is to create a clone of the main `@layer utilities` node for
  every single `@utility <name>` we want to create.
- Step #5 is to go over every clone, and eliminate everything that is
  not part of the `@utility` in question. So we can remove siblings
  (except for comments near it) and go up the chain.
- Step #6 is now to go over the initial `@layer utilities` clone we set
  aside, and remove everything that's not part of any of the clones.
- Step #7 is cleanup work, where empty nodes are removed, and rules with
  a selector of `&` are replaced by its children. This is done in a
  depth-first traversal instead of breadth first.

Co-authored-by: Jordan Pittman <[email protected]>
RobinMalfait added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 24, 2024
A bit of a vague commit message, but this does a lot of things. I could
split it up, but not sure if it's worth it. Instead, let's talk about
it.

While working on keeping track of comment locations I was running into
some issues. Not the end of the world, but we could make things better.

Paired with Jordan on this to rework the algorithm. The idea is that we
now do multiple passes which is technically slower, but now we can work
on separate units of work.

- Step #1 is to prepare the at-rule. This means that rules with multiple
  selectors will be split in multiple nodes with the their own single
  selector.
- Step #2 is to collect all the classes we want to create an `@utility`
  for.
- Step #3 is to create a clone of the main `@layer utilities` for all
  the non-`@utility` leftover nodes (E.g.: rules with element and ID
  selectors).
- Step #4 is to create a clone of the main `@layer utilities` node for
  every single `@utility <name>` we want to create.
- Step #5 is to go over every clone, and eliminate everything that is
  not part of the `@utility` in question. So we can remove siblings
  (except for comments near it) and go up the chain.
- Step #6 is now to go over the initial `@layer utilities` clone we set
  aside, and remove everything that's not part of any of the clones.
- Step #7 is cleanup work, where empty nodes are removed, and rules with
  a selector of `&` are replaced by its children. This is done in a
  depth-first traversal instead of breadth first.

Co-authored-by: Jordan Pittman <[email protected]>
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants