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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Fix SSR for breadcrumbs and collapsible-nav #3970
Fix SSR for breadcrumbs and collapsible-nav #3970
Changes from 1 commit
6f1dc4a
ed937b5
b2d934a
5ec527c
6e0b46d
5cea004
b63e4d2
86f2bde
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
Hmm, I totally understand the intent of this PR, but I don't think setting this to a static (arbitrary) number creates expected behavior.
Instead, is there a way to only do all this breakpoint logic/dependency stuff if the
window
exists? That way SSR users can apply breakpoints via CSS without it getting overridden by this static number.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.
Hmm, not really because you're not supposed to conditionally call hooks like
useState
. However I could change the code to use e.g.Infinity
or something so thatgetBreakpoint()
returnsundefined
, which it can already do according to its type. What do you think? It's a (somewhat) less arbitrary value?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 don't think that will actually return
undefined
because any number that is not less than the largest breakpoint will return the value for the largest breakpoint, ie.xl
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 can swap it for
-Infinity
, I checked over how values derived fromwindow.innerWidth
are used and I think it'll be OK.(Aside: this is a philosophical brain teaser - what is the size of a server-side window?)
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.
Accessing
window
fromfunctionToCallOnWindowResize
should never happen in SSR. The method is called fromuseEffect
which doesn't run in a non-browser environment. I believe only the change tocurrentBreakpoint
's initial state is necessary.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.
😞 The breakpoint logic also doesn't seem to be working anymore at all (even just on our docs).