feat(parser): throw error when using interpolation instead of expresssion (#9038) #9050
Conversation
This file contains 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
…ession for slot names (vuejs#9038)
yyx990803
requested changes
Dec 1, 2018
| // Fixes: #9038 | ||
| if(process.env.NODE_ENV !== 'production'){ | ||
| const slotName = el.attrsMap['name'] | ||
| if(!dirRE.test(slotName) && parseText(slotName, delimiters)){ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why dirRE.test here? Seems unnecessary.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've added this to keep the same behavior as in place where previous warning exists (line 596). As you can see that previous warning is shown only when dirRE.test is false.
processSlot is executed outside of processAttrs thus I've added this additional check, to prevent double warnings
13 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What kind of change does this PR introduce? (check at least one)
Does this PR introduce a breaking change? (check one)
The PR fulfills these requirements:
devbranch for v2.x (or to a previous version branch), not themasterbranchfix #xxx[,#xxx], where "xxx" is the issue number)If adding a new feature, the PR's description includes:
Yes it's already an open issue with
good first issuelabel. Resolves: #9038