-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.4k
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: The needsMask check should also be ignored when the childNode array length is equal to 0 #1402
Conversation
…ray length is 0 When checking needsMask, the n.hildnode is not rigorous and the array length is greater than 0, thus ignoring the leaf component
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 1204d10 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 8 packages
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
@Paulhejia looks like this breaks in certain cases (see failing tests), could you fix them? |
…ements' optimisation wasn't being applied as `n.childNodes` was always truthy even when there were no childNodes. Changing it to `n.childNodes.length` directly there (see rrweb-io#1402) actually caused a bug as during a mutation, we serialize the text node directly, and need to jump to the parentElement to do the check. This is why I've reimplemented this optimisation inside `needMaskingText` where we are already had an `isElement` test
Thanks @Paulhejia |
* Minor fixup for #1349; the 'we can avoid the check on leaf elements' optimisation wasn't being applied as `n.childNodes` was always truthy even when there were no childNodes. Changing it to `n.childNodes.length` directly there (see #1402) actually caused a bug as during a mutation, we serialize the text node directly, and need to jump to the parentElement to do the check. This is why I've reimplemented this optimisation inside `needMaskingText` where we are already had an `isElement` test Thanks to @Paulhejia (https://github.com/Paulhejia/rrweb/) for spotting that `Boolean(n.childNodes)` is aways true.
* Minor fixup for rrweb-io#1349; the 'we can avoid the check on leaf elements' optimisation wasn't being applied as `n.childNodes` was always truthy even when there were no childNodes. Changing it to `n.childNodes.length` directly there (see rrweb-io#1402) actually caused a bug as during a mutation, we serialize the text node directly, and need to jump to the parentElement to do the check. This is why I've reimplemented this optimisation inside `needMaskingText` where we are already had an `isElement` test Thanks to @Paulhejia (https://github.com/Paulhejia/rrweb/) for spotting that `Boolean(n.childNodes)` is aways true.
* Minor fixup for rrweb-io#1349; the 'we can avoid the check on leaf elements' optimisation wasn't being applied as `n.childNodes` was always truthy even when there were no childNodes. Changing it to `n.childNodes.length` directly there (see rrweb-io#1402) actually caused a bug as during a mutation, we serialize the text node directly, and need to jump to the parentElement to do the check. This is why I've reimplemented this optimisation inside `needMaskingText` where we are already had an `isElement` test Thanks to @Paulhejia (https://github.com/Paulhejia/rrweb/) for spotting that `Boolean(n.childNodes)` is aways true.
When checking needsMask, it is not rigorous to determine whether n.childNode exists, but also to determine whether the array length is greater than 0