Repository navigation
fix: exclude the :has anchor from implicit descendants #1937
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
Open
manav4u
wants to merge
6
commits into
fb55:master
Choose a base branch
from
manav4u:fix/has-anchor-descendants
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
295f3b4
fix: exclude the :has anchor from implicit descendants
manav4u dc61b22
fix: exclude the :has anchor from implicit descendants
manav4u fccb9a2
fix: preserve nested anchor matching inside :has
manav4u 9393c50
fix: preserve nested anchor matching inside :has
manav4u 026e772
Add isHasSubselector parameter to CompileToken type
manav4u 84a7029
Add test for inclusive scope in nested selectors
manav4u File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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.
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.
On
<div class="a"><i class="b"></i></div>,.a:has(:scope:is(:scope .a) > .b)now matches, although the anchor cannot be a descendant of itself. The nested:is()call leavesisHasSubselectorfalse, so this branch rewrites its explicit:scope .ato_flexibleDescendant. That makes the query return an element that does not match.Keep explicit descendant relationships strict inside
:has()while allowing the implicit relationship needed by:is(.a).Knowledge Base Used: Nested selector pseudo-selectors
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.
Reproduced on both the original base (
ca67a21) and the current head (84a7029):.a:has(:scope:is(:scope .a) > .b)returns a match, and the corresponding:not(:scope .a)form returns none. The results agree acrosscompile,is, andselectAll, with caching on and off.The initial placeholder guard happened to suppress this case, but also broke the existing
.a:has(:scope:is(.a) > .b)behavior. The follow-up restores that behavior while retaining the #1928 fix.This explicit-scope case remains a pre-existing limitation related to #1931, which this PR leaves out of scope. Keeping it separate avoids changing query-scope semantics as part of the anchor-descendant fix.
This analysis was prepared with AI assistance.