Svelte 5 Migration #161
Svelte 5 Migration #161
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request includes significant updates to various Svelte components and the Changes
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
src/lib/emails/welcome_email_html.svelte (1)
119-294: Well-structured implementation for Svelte 5 compatibility.The systematic addition of tbody tags to all table structures is a proper solution to prevent Svelte 5 migration errors while maintaining email client compatibility. The changes follow HTML email best practices and preserve the existing responsive design.
References:
- Svelte GitHub issue #9785
- HTML email best practices for table structures
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- src/lib/emails/welcome_email_html.svelte (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
src/lib/emails/welcome_email_html.svelte (4)
119-294: LGTM: Proper tbody implementation in the main table structure.The addition of tbody tags to the main table structure is correct and maintains email client compatibility while preparing for Svelte 5 migration.
151-220: LGTM: Proper tbody implementation in the main content table.The tbody addition in the main content area is correctly implemented while maintaining the existing structure and styling.
237-280: LGTM: Proper tbody implementation in the footer table.The tbody addition in the footer table is correctly implemented while maintaining email client compatibility.
178-211: LGTM: Proper tbody implementation in nested button tables.The tbody tags are correctly added to both levels of nested tables in the button structure, maintaining compatibility and styling.
|
Oh cool - does the project otherwise work with svelte 5? I've been meaning to try it. For this, we should just ignore any validation issues for this file. Email html is.... awful. To work in all email clients you need to work with a random old subset of proper html. This template was from a repo where they tested to make sure it works in all clients (Yahoo mail, etc). Not using tbody was intentional, even if modern linters complain. We could use inline ignore comments, or file-based ignores. Want to take a stab at that? |
evlim
force-pushed
the
svelte5
branch
2 times, most recently
from
6cb2688 to
e100056
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 7
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (14)
src/routes/(admin)/account/sign_out/+page.svelte (1)
8-8: Consider adding type annotation for state variable.
The migration to $state() is correct, but we could improve type safety.
Consider adding a type annotation:
-let message = $state("Signing out....")
+let message: string = $state("Signing out....")src/routes/(admin)/account/+layout.svelte (1)
2-2: Consider documenting the temporary nature of the legacy import.
The run import from "svelte/legacy" suggests this is a migration helper. Consider adding a TODO comment to track its removal once Svelte 5 is stable.
+// TODO: Remove legacy import once migrated to stable Svelte 5
import { run } from "svelte/legacy"src/lib/emails/welcome_email_text.svelte (1)
11-14: Enhance Props interface documentation
Consider replacing the generic comment with proper JSDoc documentation for the Props interface and its properties.
- interface Props {
- // Define all your props here
- companyName?: string;
- }
+ /**
+ * Props for the welcome email template
+ */
+ interface Props {
+ /** The company name to display in the welcome email */
+ companyName?: string;
+ }src/routes/+layout.svelte (1)
26-26: Children rendering implementation is correct for Svelte 5.
The {@render children?.()} syntax properly handles the new rendering approach while safely handling undefined cases.
Consider documenting this pattern in your migration guide or component guidelines, as this represents a significant change in how child content is handled compared to previous Svelte versions. This will help maintain consistency as more components are migrated.
src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/settings/+page.svelte (1)
9-10: Consider adding type information for props.
The migration to using $props() looks good, but consider adding TypeScript interface for better type safety:
interface PageProps {
data: {
profile: {
full_name?: string;
company_name?: string;
website?: string;
unsubscribed?: boolean;
};
user: {
email?: string;
};
}
}Then update the props declaration:
let { data } = $props<PageProps>();src/routes/(marketing)/pricing/pricing_module.svelte (1)
Line range hint 41-43: Remove unnecessary empty ul element
There's an empty <ul></ul> tag that appears to serve no purpose and should be removed.
{#each plan.features as feature}
<li class="">{feature}</li>
{/each}
- <ul></ul>src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/settings/change_password/+page.svelte (2)
24-25: Consider adding non-null assertion for button ref
The state management changes look good, but you might want to consider adding a non-null assertion when using sendBtn since we know it will be defined after the button is mounted.
-let sendBtn: HTMLButtonElement | undefined = $state()
+let sendBtn: HTMLButtonElement = $state(undefined as unknown as HTMLButtonElement)Line range hint 27-43: Enhance button state management
Consider refactoring the button handling logic to:
- Extract repeated button text to a constant
- Consolidate button state management
- Add error handling feedback
+const BUTTON_TEXT = "Send Forgot Password"
+
let sendForgotPassword = () => {
if (sendBtn) {
sendBtn.disabled = true
- sendBtn.textContent = "Sending..."
+ sendBtn.textContent = "Sending..."
}
let email = user?.email
if (email) {
supabase.auth
.resetPasswordForEmail(email, {
redirectTo: `${$page.url.origin}/auth/callback?next=%2Faccount%2Fsettings%2Freset_password`,
})
.then((d) => {
- sentEmail = d.error ? false : true
+ if (d.error) {
+ sentEmail = false
+ // Show error feedback to user
+ if (sendBtn) {
+ sendBtn.classList.add('btn-error')
+ }
+ } else {
+ sentEmail = true
+ }
if (sendBtn) {
sendBtn.disabled = false
- sendBtn.textContent = "Send Forgot Password"
+ sendBtn.textContent = BUTTON_TEXT
}
})
}src/routes/(admin)/account/create_profile/+page.svelte (1)
Line range hint 41-115: Consider adding client-side validation.
While the form handles server-side errors well, adding client-side validation would improve user experience by providing immediate feedback before submission.
Consider:
- Validate inputs before submission
- Add aria-invalid attributes for accessibility
- Show validation messages in real-time
Example implementation for the fullName field:
<input
id="fullName"
name="fullName"
type="text"
placeholder="Your full name"
class="{fieldError(form, 'fullName') || !isValidName(fullName)
? 'input-error'
: ''} mt-1 input input-bordered w-full max-w-xs"
value={form?.fullName ?? fullName}
maxlength="50"
aria-invalid={!isValidName(fullName)}
on:input={(e) => validateName(e.currentTarget.value)}
/>
{#if !isValidName(fullName)}
<span class="text-red-600 text-sm">Please enter a valid name</span>
{/if}src/routes/(marketing)/search/+page.svelte (2)
2-2: Consider marking legacy imports for future cleanup.
The run import from 'svelte/legacy' is typically used as a temporary solution during Svelte 5 migration. Consider adding a TODO comment to track its removal once the migration is complete.
Line range hint 69-88: Fix the keyboard navigation boundary condition.
The upper bound check for focusItem should be results.length - 1 since array indices are zero-based:
-} else if (focusItem > results.length) {
- focusItem = results.length
+} else if (focusItem >= results.length) {
+ focusItem = results.length - 1src/routes/(marketing)/contact_us/+page.svelte (2)
Line range hint 47-63: Consider adding explicit network error handling.
While the error handling is comprehensive for server responses, consider adding explicit handling for network failures that might occur during form submission.
const handleSubmit: SubmitFunction = () => {
loading = true
errors = {}
- return async ({ update, result }) => {
+ return async ({ update, result }) => {
+ try {
await update({ reset: false })
await applyAction(result)
loading = false
if (result.type === "success") {
showSuccess = true
} else if (result.type === "failure") {
errors = result.data?.errors ?? {}
} else if (result.type === "error") {
errors = { _: "An error occurred. Please check inputs and try again." }
}
+ } catch (error) {
+ loading = false
+ errors = { _: "Network error. Please check your connection and try again." }
+ }
}
}Line range hint 124-141: Enhance form accessibility.
While the form structure is generally accessible, consider these improvements:
- Add
aria-invalidandaria-describedbyfor error states - Add the
requiredattribute to mandatory fields
<input
id={field.id}
name={field.id}
type={field.inputType}
autocomplete={field.autocomplete}
+ required={field.label.includes('*')}
+ aria-invalid={errors[field.id] ? 'true' : undefined}
+ aria-describedby={errors[field.id] ? `${field.id}-error` : undefined}
class="{errors[field.id]
? 'input-error'
: ''} input-sm mt-1 input input-bordered w-full mb-3 text-base py-4"
/>
{#if errors[field.id]}
- <div class="text-red-600 flex-grow text-sm ml-2 text-right">
+ <div
+ id="{field.id}-error"
+ class="text-red-600 flex-grow text-sm ml-2 text-right"
+ role="alert">
{errors[field.id]}
</div>
{/if}src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/settings/settings_module.svelte (1)
24-37: Consider enhancing interface documentation
The Props interface is well-structured, but the documentation comment "Module context" could be more descriptive. Consider adding more detailed documentation about the purpose of each property group.
interface Props {
- // Module context
+ // Configuration properties for the settings module
+ // Controls the display and behavior of the form
editable?: boolean
dangerous?: boolean
title?: string📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (24)
- package.json (2 hunks)
- src/lib/emails/welcome_email_text.svelte (1 hunks)
- src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/+layout.svelte (5 hunks)
- src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/billing/+page.svelte (1 hunks)
- src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/settings/+page.svelte (1 hunks)
- src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/settings/change_email/+page.svelte (1 hunks)
- src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/settings/change_email_subscription/+page.svelte (1 hunks)
- src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/settings/change_password/+page.svelte (4 hunks)
- src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/settings/delete_account/+page.svelte (1 hunks)
- src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/settings/edit_profile/+page.svelte (1 hunks)
- src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/settings/settings_module.svelte (2 hunks)
- src/routes/(admin)/account/+layout.svelte (2 hunks)
- src/routes/(admin)/account/create_profile/+page.svelte (1 hunks)
- src/routes/(admin)/account/sign_out/+page.svelte (1 hunks)
- src/routes/(marketing)/+layout.svelte (5 hunks)
- src/routes/(marketing)/blog/(posts)/+layout.svelte (4 hunks)
- src/routes/(marketing)/contact_us/+page.svelte (1 hunks)
- src/routes/(marketing)/login/+layout.svelte (2 hunks)
- src/routes/(marketing)/login/forgot_password/+page.svelte (1 hunks)
- src/routes/(marketing)/login/sign_in/+page.svelte (1 hunks)
- src/routes/(marketing)/login/sign_up/+page.svelte (1 hunks)
- src/routes/(marketing)/pricing/pricing_module.svelte (1 hunks)
- src/routes/(marketing)/search/+page.svelte (5 hunks)
- src/routes/+layout.svelte (2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (49)
src/routes/(admin)/account/sign_out/+page.svelte (1)
5-5: Props migration looks good!
The change from export let data to let { data } = $props() follows the recommended Svelte 5 migration pattern.
Let's verify this migration pattern is consistent across other components:
src/routes/(admin)/account/+layout.svelte (2)
Line range hint 14-23: LGTM! Auth state handling is well-implemented.
The authentication state management is properly implemented with appropriate cleanup.
25-25: Verify consistent slot handling across the application.
The change to {@render children?.()} is correct for Svelte 5, but we should ensure this pattern is consistently applied across all layout components.
✅ Verification successful
Slot handling is consistently implemented across the application
The codebase shows consistent usage of the new Svelte 5 {@render children?.()} syntax across all layout components. There are no instances of the old <slot> syntax remaining, and all layout files are using the new pattern correctly.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any remaining old-style slot usage that might need updating
rg '<slot\s*/?>' --type svelte
# Search for new render syntax usage to verify consistency
rg '{@render children\?' --type svelte
Length of output: 199
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any remaining old-style slot usage
rg '<slot\s*/?' -g '*.svelte'
# Search for new render syntax usage
rg '@render children' -g '*.svelte'
Length of output: 471
src/routes/(marketing)/login/+layout.svelte (4)
2-4: LGTM: Well-structured Props interface
The Props interface is correctly defined with proper typing for the optional children prop using Svelte's Snippet type.
21-21: LGTM: Proper migration to Svelte 5's rendering syntax
The change from <slot /> to {@render children?.()} correctly implements Svelte 5's new approach to rendering child content.
Line range hint 1-25: Verify PR objectives alignment
While these changes implement valid Svelte 5 migrations, they don't appear to address the tbody-related changes mentioned in the PR objectives. Consider verifying if:
- The tbody changes are in a different file that wasn't provided for review
- The PR scope has expanded to include additional Svelte 5 migration changes
Let's search for the relevant email template files:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for table-related HTML in the codebase
rg -l "<table" --type svelte
rg -l "<tbody" --type svelte6-7: Correct implementation of Svelte 5 reactivity primitives
The changes properly implement Svelte 5's new reactivity system using $props() and $state().
Let's verify if similar reactivity updates are needed in other components:
✅ Verification successful
The previous script failed because the --type svelte flag wasn't supported. Let's try without the file type filter and analyze the results to identify Svelte components.
The previous results show minimal usage, but let's verify more thoroughly by finding all Svelte files and their state-related patterns to ensure we have a complete picture.
Svelte 5 reactivity primitives are consistently used across the codebase
The verification shows that the codebase consistently follows Svelte 5's reactivity patterns:
- All components properly use
$props()for props destructuring - State management consistently uses
$state()for reactive variables - The changes in login/+layout.svelte align with the codebase's patterns
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for potential missed migrations to $state and $props
rg "let \w+ = false" --type svelte
rg "export let \w+" --type svelte
Length of output: 123
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for potential missed migrations using ripgrep without file type filter
# Look for boolean variable declarations
rg "let \w+ = false"
rg "let \w+ = true"
# Look for prop declarations
rg "export let \w+"
Length of output: 145
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a more comprehensive search for Svelte files and their content
# First find all Svelte files
fd "\.svelte$"
# Then look for any let declarations to ensure we're not missing anything
rg "^\s*let " --type-add 'svelte:*.svelte' --type svelte
# And also check for state-related patterns
rg "\$state|props\(\)" --type-add 'svelte:*.svelte' --type svelte
Length of output: 10822
src/routes/(marketing)/login/sign_up/+page.svelte (2)
5-5: LGTM: Proper migration to Svelte 5 props pattern
The change from export let data to let { data } = $props() follows the recommended pattern for Svelte 5 migration.
Line range hint 1-24: Verify PR scope: No table/tbody changes found
This file contains prop restructuring changes for Svelte 5 migration, but doesn't contain any table-related changes mentioned in the PR objectives. This might indicate that either:
- The tbody changes are in other files not included in this review
- The PR description might need updating to reflect all changes
Let's verify if there are any table-related changes in other files:
src/routes/(marketing)/login/forgot_password/+page.svelte (2)
5-5: LGTM: Correct implementation of Svelte 5's props system.
The change from export let data to let { data } = $props() follows the new props system introduced in Svelte 5.
Line range hint 1-24: Verify: Changes seem unrelated to PR objective.
The PR's objective mentions adding <tbody> to tables to prevent Svelte 5 migration errors, but this file contains prop system changes and no table elements. Consider:
- Verifying if this change should be part of this PR
- Updating the PR description to reflect all changes
Let's verify if there are any table-related changes that should be included in this file:
✅ Verification successful
This change is part of a broader Svelte 5 migration and should be included in this PR
The changes in this file are related to migrating from Svelte 4 to Svelte 5, specifically updating the prop system from export let to the new $props() syntax. This is consistent with the PR's commit message "migration to Svelte 5" and the package.json changes showing an upgrade from Svelte 4 to Svelte 5.
While the PR description mentions <tbody> fixes, the broader scope is Svelte 5 migration, which includes:
- Upgrading Svelte from 4.2.19 to 5.0.0
- Updating prop system across components
- Fixing table-related issues (found in other files)
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for table elements in the component or its related files
# Test 1: Check if this component or its related files contain any table elements
rg -l "table" src/routes/\(marketing\)/login/forgot_password/
# Test 2: Check if there are any table-related migration issues in this component
rg -l "<tbody" src/routes/\(marketing\)/login/forgot_password/
Length of output: 126
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's verify the PR's objective and changes more broadly
# Check PR description or commit messages for context
git log -p --grep="tbody\|table\|svelte 5" -i
# Look for any table elements in the entire codebase that might need tbody
rg -l "<table" .
# Check for other files changed in this PR
git diff --name-only HEAD~1
Length of output: 22022
src/lib/emails/welcome_email_text.svelte (2)
16-16: LGTM! Proper Svelte 5 props implementation
The transition to using $props() with destructuring and default value handling is correct and aligns with Svelte 5 migration guidelines.
Line range hint 1-1: Verify related HTML email templates
This text-only email template doesn't require tbody elements, but there might be related HTML email templates that do.
src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/settings/change_email_subscription/+page.svelte (1)
3-3: LGTM: Prop handling updated for Svelte 5 compatibility.
The change from export let data to let { data } = $props() aligns with Svelte 5's new prop handling system. This is part of a consistent pattern across multiple components in the codebase.
src/routes/+layout.svelte (2)
10-10: Props destructuring follows Svelte 5 conventions.
The use of $props() is the correct approach for Svelte 5 migration, replacing the previous export-based props system.
6-8: LGTM! Props interface is well-defined.
The interface correctly uses Svelte's Snippet type and makes the children prop optional, which is appropriate for a layout component.
Let's verify this is the standard approach across other layout components:
✅ Verification successful
Props interface is unique to this layout component
The Props interface with Snippet type is only present in the root layout (src/routes/+layout.svelte) and not in other layout components. This suggests this is an intentional change specific to the root layout as part of the Svelte 5 migration, rather than a pattern that needs to be consistent across all layouts.
- Only
src/routes/+layout.sveltedefines the Props interface with children as Snippet - Other layout files (
(marketing),(admin), etc.) don't use this pattern yet
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for consistent Props interface usage across layout components
# Expect: Similar Props interface definitions in other layout files
# Search for Props interface in layout files
rg -U "interface Props.*?}" "src/routes/**/+layout.svelte"
Length of output: 129
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to find layout files and Props interfaces
# First, find all layout files
echo "=== Finding layout files ==="
fd "+layout.svelte$"
# Then search for Props interface in all Svelte files
echo -e "\n=== Searching for Props interface definitions ==="
rg -U "interface Props.*?}" "\.svelte$"
# Also search for similar children prop type definitions
echo -e "\n=== Searching for children prop type definitions ==="
rg "children.*?:.*?Snippet" "\.svelte$"
Length of output: 804
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's correct the syntax and try again
# Find layout files
echo "=== Finding layout files ==="
fd ".+layout.svelte$"
# Search for Props interface in all Svelte files
echo -e "\n=== Searching for Props interface definitions ==="
rg -U "interface Props" --type svelte
# Search for children prop type definitions
echo -e "\n=== Searching for children prop type definitions ==="
rg "children.*Snippet" --type svelte
Length of output: 717
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's search in the found layout files directly
echo "=== Checking Props interface and children types in layout files ==="
for file in src/routes/**/*+layout.svelte src/routes/+layout.svelte; do
echo -e "\nFile: $file"
echo "----------------------------------------"
rg -U "interface Props|children.*Snippet" "$file" || true
done
Length of output: 865
src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/settings/change_email/+page.svelte (1)
9-9: Verify consistent usage of $props() across components.
The migration from export let data to let { data } = $props() looks good and aligns with Svelte 5's new prop handling pattern.
Let's verify this migration pattern is consistently applied across all Svelte components:
✅ Verification successful
Migration to $props() is consistently implemented across components
The verification shows that:
- No instances of the old
export let datapattern were found - The new
let { data } = $props()pattern is consistently used across all Svelte components in the codebase - All components using data props have been properly migrated to the new Svelte 5 pattern
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for any remaining instances of 'export let data' that might need migration
# Test 1: Find components that might still use the old pattern
echo "Checking for remaining 'export let data' patterns:"
rg "export\s+let\s+data" --type svelte
# Test 2: Verify the new pattern is used consistently
echo -e "\nVerifying new $props() pattern usage:"
rg "let\s*{\s*data\s*}\s*=\s*\$props\(\)" --type svelte
Length of output: 449
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach without relying on file type detection
# and fixing the regex escape for $props
# Check for old pattern
echo "Checking for remaining 'export let data' patterns:"
find . -type f -name "*.svelte" -exec grep -l "export let data" {} \;
# Check for new pattern (escaping $ properly)
echo -e "\nVerifying new \$props() pattern usage:"
find . -type f -name "*.svelte" -exec grep -l "let.*{.*data.*}.*=.*\$props()" {} \;
# Show the actual implementations for better context
echo -e "\nShowing implementations:"
find . -type f -name "*.svelte" -exec grep -A 1 -B 1 "export let data\|let.*{.*data.*}.*=.*\$props()" {} \;
Length of output: 1946
src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/settings/delete_account/+page.svelte (2)
9-10: Note: This change appears unrelated to the PR's stated objective.
While this is a valid Svelte 5 migration change, it seems unrelated to the PR's main objective of adding <tbody> elements to prevent migration errors. Consider splitting these changes into separate PRs for clearer change tracking:
- PR for adding
<tbody>elements - PR for Svelte 5 migration changes
Let's verify if this file should contain any table elements:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if this component or its dependencies use tables
# Expect: Find any table usage that might need tbody elements
# Check the current file and its module dependency for table elements
rg -l "<table" "src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/settings/delete_account/+page.svelte" "src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/settings/settings_module.svelte"9-10: LGTM! The migration to $props() looks correct.
The change from export let data to let { data } = $props() follows the recommended Svelte 5 migration pattern and improves type safety.
Let's verify this migration pattern across other components:
✅ Verification successful
Migration to $props() is consistently implemented across the codebase
The verification shows that:
- No instances of the old
export let datapattern were found - The
$props()migration has been consistently applied across all components - The file in question follows the same pattern as other similar components in the codebase
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for consistent migration patterns across components
# Expect: All components should use $props() instead of export let data
# Search for remaining "export let data" patterns
echo "Checking for remaining 'export let data' patterns:"
rg "export let data" "src/routes"
# Search for migrated $props() patterns
echo -e "\nChecking for migrated $props() patterns:"
rg "let \{ data \} = \$props\(\)" "src/routes"
Length of output: 317
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to search for migration patterns
# Search for remaining "export let data" patterns
echo "=== Searching for 'export let data' patterns ==="
rg --type svelte "export\s+let\s+data" src/
# Search for migrated $props() patterns
echo -e "\n=== Searching for $props() patterns ==="
rg --type svelte "\{\s*data\s*\}\s*=\s*\$props\(\)" src/
# Get a broader view of props usage
echo -e "\n=== Searching for general $props() usage ==="
rg --type svelte "\$props\(\)" src/
Length of output: 522
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try without the --type flag since Svelte isn't recognized
# Search for remaining "export let data" patterns
echo "=== Searching for 'export let data' patterns ==="
rg "export\s+let\s+data" src/
# Search for migrated $props() patterns
echo -e "\n=== Searching for $props() patterns ==="
rg "\{\s*data\s*\}\s*=\s*\\\$props\(\)" src/
# Get a broader view of props usage
echo -e "\n=== Searching for general $props() usage ==="
rg "\\\$props\(\)" src/
Length of output: 3131
src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/settings/edit_profile/+page.svelte (1)
9-9: LGTM: Proper migration to Svelte 5 props pattern
The change from export let data to let { data } = $props() follows the recommended migration pattern for Svelte 5.
src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/billing/+page.svelte (2)
14-14: LGTM: Correct Svelte 5 prop handling pattern
The change from export let data to let { data } = $props() follows the recommended pattern for Svelte 5 migration.
Line range hint 1-65: Verify: PR objectives vs actual changes
This file shows prop handling updates for Svelte 5 migration but doesn't contain the <tbody> changes mentioned in the PR objectives. Please verify if:
- The tbody changes are in other files not included in this review
- The PR description accurately reflects all intended changes
package.json (2)
19-20: Verify compatibility between development dependencies.
The updates to supporting tools (@sveltejs/kit, vite-plugin-svelte, eslint-plugin-svelte, prettier plugins, typescript) are necessary for Svelte 5 compatibility. However, ensure that:
- These versions are compatible with each other
- They support Svelte 5 features
- Your existing configurations work with the new versions
#!/bin/bash
# Check for potential version conflicts or compatibility issues
# Look for svelte configuration files
fd -e config.js -e config.cjs -e config.ts
# Check for custom eslint/prettier configurations that might need updates
fd -e .eslintrc -e .prettierrcAlso applies to: 31-31, 37-38, 43-43
40-41: Major version upgrade to Svelte 5 requires careful consideration.
The upgrade from Svelte 4 to 5 represents a significant change that introduces breaking changes and new features. Given that Svelte 5 is still in its early release (5.0.0), consider the following:
- Review the Svelte 5 migration guide thoroughly
- Plan for comprehensive testing across all components
- Consider implementing the migration in phases
src/routes/(marketing)/login/sign_in/+page.svelte (1)
8-9: LGTM! Correct implementation of Svelte 5 migration pattern.
The change from export let data to let { data } = $props() follows the recommended migration pattern for Svelte 5. The destructuring and subsequent usage of data and supabase are consistent throughout the component.
Let's verify the component's props and types:
✅ Verification successful
The Svelte 5 migration change is correct and type-safe
The change from export let data to let { data } = $props() is verified to be correct because:
- The layout's load function (
+layout.ts) properly returns the expected data shape with{ supabase, url } - These properties are correctly used in the component through
data.supabaseanddata.url - The migration follows Svelte 5's recommended patterns for prop handling
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the PageData type definition for this route
# to ensure type safety is maintained after the migration
# Search for PageData interface or type definition
rg -t ts "interface PageData|type PageData" "src/routes/(marketing)/login/sign_in"
# Search for references to the component to verify prop passing
rg -t svelte "\/login\/sign_in\/\+page\.svelte" "src/routes"
Length of output: 244
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try different approaches to verify the types and usage
# 1. Look for PageData type in the +page.ts or +page.server.ts files
fd -e ts "page" "src/routes/(marketing)/login/sign_in"
# 2. Look for the actual component usage with proper escaping
rg -l "login/sign_in/\+page\.svelte" src/routes
# 3. Check the component's interface and props
cat "src/routes/(marketing)/login/sign_in/+page.svelte"
# 4. Look for any type definitions in nearby files
fd -e ts -e d.ts . "src/routes/(marketing)/login/sign_in"
Length of output: 2173
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the server file to understand the data structure being passed
cat "src/routes/(marketing)/login/sign_in/+page.server.ts"
# Also check if there are any type definitions in the login_config
cat "src/routes/(marketing)/login/login_config.ts"
Length of output: 974
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the layout files for data passing and hooks
fd "(layout|hooks).(ts|js|svelte)" "src/routes/(marketing)/login"
# Also check for any root level types that might be defining the data structure
fd -e ts "types" "src"
Length of output: 172
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the layout files which likely define the data structure
cat "src/routes/(marketing)/login/+layout.ts"
cat "src/routes/(marketing)/login/+layout.svelte"
Length of output: 1678
src/routes/(marketing)/pricing/pricing_module.svelte (2)
4-10: LGTM: Well-structured Props interface
The Props interface is well-defined with appropriate optional markers and clear property names. This enhances type safety and component documentation.
12-17: Props destructuring looks good, verify Svelte 5 compatibility
The migration to Svelte 5's $props() pattern is implemented correctly with appropriate default values.
Let's verify other components are consistently using the new pattern:
✅ Verification successful
Props migration to Svelte 5 pattern is consistent across the codebase
The codebase shows a thorough migration to Svelte 5's $props() pattern with only one component (welcome_email_html.svelte) still using the older export let syntax. Since email templates often have different requirements and patterns, this is likely intentional.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for other components that might need similar updates
rg -l "export let" --type svelte
# Check for components already migrated to $props()
rg -l "\$props\(\)" --type svelte
Length of output: 131
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for other components that might need similar updates
rg -l "export let"
# Check for components already migrated to $props()
rg -l "\\\$props\\(\\)"
Length of output: 1229
src/routes/(marketing)/blog/(posts)/+layout.svelte (4)
6-10: LGTM: Props implementation follows Svelte 5 best practices
The Props interface and destructuring implementation correctly follows Svelte 5's new prop handling patterns, providing proper type safety for the optional children prop.
25-25: LGTM: Proper conversion to derived stores
The conversion of reactive statements to derived stores using $derived follows Svelte 5's recommended patterns for reactive state management.
Also applies to: 42-42
77-77: LGTM: Proper implementation of Svelte 5 render syntax
The change from slot to {@render children?.()} correctly implements Svelte 5's new rendering pattern with proper optional chaining.
Line range hint 1-77: Verify: PR changes differ from stated objective
While these changes implement proper Svelte 5 migration patterns, they don't match the PR title's mention of adding tbody elements to tables. Could you clarify if there are additional changes missing from this PR or if the PR title needs to be updated?
src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/settings/change_password/+page.svelte (1)
10-12: LGTM: Proper migration to Svelte 5 props syntax
The change from export let data to let { data } = $props() correctly implements Svelte 5's new prop handling mechanism.
src/routes/(admin)/account/create_profile/+page.svelte (2)
11-11: LGTM! Correctly implements Svelte 5 props pattern.
The change from direct exports to using $props() follows the recommended pattern for Svelte 5 migration.
15-15: LGTM! Correctly implements Svelte 5 reactive state.
The change to $state(false) properly implements Svelte 5's reactive state management. However, let's verify that all loading state updates are handled correctly throughout the component.
✅ Verification successful
Loading state is correctly implemented and consistently used
The loading state is properly managed throughout the component:
- Initialized as reactive state with
$state(false) - Set to
trueat the start of form submission - Correctly reset to
falseafter form processing completes - Used within an async context to properly track the loading state during the entire operation
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Verify loading state usage consistency
rg -A 2 -B 2 "loading\s*=\s*" "src/routes/(admin)/account/create_profile/+page.svelte"
Length of output: 470
src/routes/(marketing)/+layout.svelte (4)
4-10: LGTM! Well-structured type definitions and prop handling.
The changes properly implement Svelte 5's recommended prop handling with proper TypeScript definitions. The use of JSDoc for type documentation and $props() for prop destructuring follows best practices.
29-29: LGTM! Good accessibility improvement.
Adding the aria-label to the search link improves screen reader accessibility.
82-82: LGTM! Proper Svelte 5 children rendering implementation.
The change from <slot /> to {@render children?.()} correctly implements Svelte 5's new approach to rendering children components. The optional chaining operator ensures safe rendering when children are undefined.
44-45: Verify if a11y ignores can be avoided.
While these ignores are common in dropdown menu implementations, it's worth investigating if we can make the menu more accessible without ignoring these warnings.
Let's check if similar patterns exist in the codebase and if anyone has solved this differently:
Also applies to: 61-61
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more context about the dropdown menu implementation to better understand if these a11y ignores can be avoided.
Let me check if there are any button or menu-related components in the codebase that might show a better accessibility pattern.
A11y ignores are necessary for this hamburger menu implementation
The a11y ignores are justified in this case because:
- The implementation uses DaisyUI's dropdown pattern which requires a label as a trigger and a tabindex for keyboard navigation
- The menu is only visible on mobile (
sm:hiddenclass) - The pattern is consistently used across the codebase for similar mobile menu implementations
While there might be more accessible patterns, changing this would require significant refactoring of the menu component and its dependencies. The current implementation maintains basic keyboard accessibility through tabindex.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for similar a11y ignore patterns and potential solutions
rg "svelte-ignore a11y" -B 2 -A 2
Length of output: 830
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Get the full dropdown menu implementation context
rg -B 10 -A 10 "dropdown dropdown-end" src/routes/\(marketing\)/+layout.svelte
# Look for other dropdown implementations in the codebase that might be more accessible
rg -B 5 -A 5 "class=\"dropdown"
Length of output: 2890
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Look for button or menu components
fd -e svelte -e ts -e js | grep -i "button\|menu"
# Get more context about the hamburger menu implementation
rg -B 5 -A 15 "btn-ghost btn-circle" src/routes/\(marketing\)/+layout.svelte
Length of output: 1694
src/routes/(marketing)/search/+page.svelte (2)
21-24: LGTM! Clean conversion to Svelte 5 state management.
The conversion of variables to use $state() is well-implemented, maintaining type safety and initial values.
56-67: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider combining reactive blocks to prevent race conditions.
The current implementation has two separate reactive blocks that could potentially race:
- One updating search results
- Another updating the URL hash
Consider combining these operations into a single reactive block:
-run(() => {
- if (fuse) {
- results = fuse.search(searchQuery)
- }
-})
-
-run(() => {
- if (browser && window.location.hash.slice(1) !== searchQuery) {
- goto("#" + searchQuery, { keepFocus: true })
- }
-})
+run(() => {
+ if (fuse) {
+ results = fuse.search(searchQuery)
+ if (browser && window.location.hash.slice(1) !== searchQuery) {
+ goto("#" + searchQuery, { keepFocus: true })
+ }
+ }
+})src/routes/(marketing)/contact_us/+page.svelte (1)
5-7: LGTM: State management updates align with Svelte 5 requirements.
The migration to $state for managing reactive variables is correctly implemented, maintaining proper typing and appropriate initial values.
src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/settings/settings_module.svelte (3)
12-13: LGTM: Proper usage of Svelte 5's state management
The conversion of loading and showSuccess to use $state() is correct and aligns with Svelte 5's new reactivity system.
39-51: LGTM: Props implementation is correct
The props destructuring using $props() is properly implemented with appropriate default values.
Line range hint 1-180: Verify table structure for email compatibility
Based on the PR objectives, this component is used in email templates and requires a <tbody> element. However, I don't see any table elements in this component. Let's verify if this is the correct file that needs the modification.
src/routes/(admin)/account/(menu)/+layout.svelte (5)
6-8: LGTM: Props interface enhances type safety
The addition of the Props interface with the optional children prop of type Snippet aligns well with Svelte 5's type system and improves code documentation.
10-10: State management updates align with Svelte 5 best practices
The transition to using $props() for prop destructuring and $state() for reactive state management follows Svelte 5's recommended patterns for handling component state.
Also applies to: 14-14
55-55: LGTM: Child content rendering follows Svelte 5 patterns
The change to {@render children?.()} properly implements Svelte 5's rendering system with null safety.
60-60: LGTM: Properly closed label tag
The addition of the closing tag for the drawer overlay label improves HTML validity.
Line range hint 1-160: Verify alignment with PR objectives
While this file includes Svelte 5 migration changes, it doesn't contain any table elements or tbody-related changes mentioned in the PR objectives. Please verify if this file should be included in this PR or if the tbody changes are missing.
| let { data, children } = $props() | ||
|
|
||
| let { supabase, session } = data | ||
| $: ({ supabase, session } = data) | ||
| let { supabase, session } = $state(data) | ||
| run(() => { | ||
| ;({ supabase, session } = data) | ||
| }) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider simplifying the state synchronization.
The current state synchronization could be more concise by combining the state declaration and synchronization.
-let { supabase, session } = $state(data)
-run(() => {
- ;({ supabase, session } = data)
-})
+let { supabase, session } = $state(() => data)📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| let { data, children } = $props() | |
| let { supabase, session } = data | |
| $: ({ supabase, session } = data) | |
| let { supabase, session } = $state(data) | |
| run(() => { | |
| ;({ supabase, session } = data) | |
| }) | |
| let { data, children } = $props() | |
| let { supabase, session } = $state(() => data) |
| "svelte": "^5.0.0", | ||
| "svelte-check": "^4.0.0", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider adding Svelte 5 migration testing strategy.
To ensure a smooth transition to Svelte 5:
- Add a pre-migration test suite to establish baseline functionality
- Document known breaking changes and required updates
- Consider adding specific test scripts for migration validation
Add these scripts to the scripts section:
"scripts": {
+ "test:migration": "vitest run --config vitest.migration.config.js",
+ "validate:svelte5": "svelte-migrate check"
}Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| let jsonldScript = $derived( | ||
| `<script type="application/ld+json">${ | ||
| JSON.stringify(buildLdJson(currentPost)) + "<" | ||
| }/script>`, | ||
| ) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Security: Potential XSS vulnerability in JSON-LD script generation
The string concatenation of < in the JSON-LD script could potentially lead to script tag injection. Consider using a safer approach to generate the script content.
Apply this fix:
- let jsonldScript = $derived(
- `<script type="application/ld+json">${
- JSON.stringify(buildLdJson(currentPost)) + "<"
- }/script>`,
- )
+ let jsonldScript = $derived(
+ `<script type="application/ld+json">${
+ JSON.stringify(buildLdJson(currentPost))
+ }</script>`
+ )📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| let jsonldScript = $derived( | |
| `<script type="application/ld+json">${ | |
| JSON.stringify(buildLdJson(currentPost)) + "<" | |
| }/script>`, | |
| ) | |
| let jsonldScript = $derived( | |
| `<script type="application/ld+json">${ | |
| JSON.stringify(buildLdJson(currentPost)) | |
| }</script>` | |
| ) |
| @@ -95,7 +102,7 @@ | |||
| <button | |||
| class="btn btn-outline btn-wide {sentEmail ? 'hidden' : ''}" | |||
| bind:this={sendBtn} | |||
| on:click={sendForgotPassword} | |||
| onclick={sendForgotPassword} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Revert to Svelte's event handling convention
The change from on:click to onclick deviates from Svelte's recommended event handling pattern. Svelte's on:click directive provides better event handling and automatic cleanup.
-onclick={sendForgotPassword}
+on:click={sendForgotPassword}📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| onclick={sendForgotPassword} | |
| on:click={sendForgotPassword} |
| interface Props { | ||
| data: any | ||
| form: FormAccountUpdateResult | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider improving type safety for the Props interface.
While the interface addition is good for structure, the data property using any type reduces type safety. Consider creating a more specific type for the data property based on its expected shape.
interface Props {
- data: any
+ data: {
+ user: { email: string }
+ profile?: {
+ full_name?: string
+ company_name?: string
+ website?: string
+ }
+ }
form: FormAccountUpdateResult
}Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| bind:value={searchQuery} | ||
| on:focus={() => (focusItem = 0)} | ||
| onfocus={() => (focusItem = 0)} | ||
| aria-label="Search input" | ||
| /> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider enhancing screen reader support.
While the search input is properly labeled, consider adding ARIA live regions to announce search results to screen readers:
<label class="input input-bordered flex items-center gap-2 mt-10">
<input
id="search-input"
type="text"
class="grow"
placeholder="Search"
bind:value={searchQuery}
onfocus={() => (focusItem = 0)}
aria-label="Search input"
/>
</label>
+<div aria-live="polite" class="sr-only">
+ {#if results.length > 0}
+ {results.length} results found
+ {:else if searchQuery.length > 0 && !loading}
+ No results found
+ {/if}
+</div>Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| @@ -68,7 +73,7 @@ | |||
| <a | |||
| href="/account" | |||
| class={adminSection === "home" ? "active" : ""} | |||
| on:click={closeDrawer} | |||
| onclick={closeDrawer} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider using Svelte's event directive instead of onclick
The change from on:click to onclick might cause issues with Svelte's event handling system. Svelte's on:click directive is preferred as it:
- Properly handles event delegation
- Integrates better with Svelte's reactivity system
- Provides better TypeScript integration
Apply this change to all click handlers:
-onclick={closeDrawer}
+on:click={closeDrawer}Also applies to: 98-98, 117-117
|
Somehow the migration works (with some minor adjustments) if we fix the email html. Will check again later |
|
file: /home/runner/work/CMSaasStarter/CMSaasStarter/src/lib/emails/welcome_email_html.svelte:119:6 117 | bgcolor="#f4f5f6" ^ 120 | <td 121 | style="font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; vertical-align: top;" Error: Process completed with exit code 1.` |
|
Is it possible to find another email template? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
package-lock.jsonis excluded by!**/package-lock.json
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- src/routes/(admin)/account/create_profile/+page.svelte (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
src/routes/(admin)/account/create_profile/+page.svelte (3)
6-19: Well-structured type definitions!
The interfaces provide good type safety and clear structure for the component's data. The optional properties in the Profile interface appropriately reflect the form's initial state.
Line range hint 31-124: Form implementation follows best practices.
The form implementation is well-structured with:
- Proper SvelteKit form enhancement
- Comprehensive error handling and display
- Appropriate loading state management
Line range hint 1-1: Verify the PR implementation against objectives.
The PR objectives mention adding <tbody> elements to tables to prevent Svelte 5 migration errors. However, this file doesn't contain any table elements. We should verify if:
- The changes were made to the correct files
- All necessary files are included in the review
| let { data, form }: Props = $props() | ||
|
|
||
| let { user, profile } = data | ||
|
|
||
| let loading = false | ||
| let loading = $state(false) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider optimizing the data destructuring pattern.
While the current implementation works, you could simplify the destructuring pattern to avoid the intermediate step.
- let { data, form }: Props = $props()
- let { user, profile } = data
+ let { data: { user, profile }, form }: Props = $props()📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| let { data, form }: Props = $props() | |
| let { user, profile } = data | |
| let loading = false | |
| let loading = $state(false) | |
| let { data: { user, profile }, form }: Props = $props() | |
| let loading = $state(false) |
|
@evlim cool work! Where's this at? I assume it's a full Svelte 5 port, and not just email as the title indicates 😀. Is it ready or still working on it? Was the first commit just the regular tool or did it already have some of your work mixed in? For code reviewing I'd like to swap out the automatic migration from project specific changes. re:email - I'll think on that. A few ways to solve, including just changing template or doing plaintext as you mention. |
|
@scosman re:email I also thought about moving the email content to a separate file outside of src, for example in static. But that can lead to XSS attack. Changed title, thanks! It's ready. Just need to think about email. The first commit is just the migration script from Svelte. |
evlim
changed the title
No other manual changes, just the script. I'll merge #161 into here, I just want to be able to CR the changes in that branch separate from the automatic changes by this command.
|
@evlim doing some weird branching to merge this in steps, but making it's way in |
Required for Svelte 5 to prevent: sveltejs/svelte#9785
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation
Refactor
$props().<slot />syntax with{@render children?.()}for more explicit rendering control.