Roman Komarov
Roman Komarov
Test case: ``` js test('with a wrapped component', () => { const wrappedComponent = bemto('.wrappedComponent'); testSnapshot( bemto(wrappedComponent), { className: 'newClassname', _mod: 'value' } ); }); ``` Right now this would...
Similar to `.extend` and `.withComponent` for styled-components, but in a way it would be possible to redefine just everything, returning a new component based on original params merged with the...
Right now the code is a mess. It should be rewritten, simplified, modularized & covered by small unit tests. Otherwise, adding new features would become more and more hassle.
If I could find a nice way to have this as an optional peer dependency (codependency?), we could utilize https://github.com/d6u/react-container-query for container queries implementation right on bemto-components. Imaginary ideal syntax:...
It would be a nice to have a more simple way of doing subj: for extend of styled-components we can't use nesting in CSS, so we'd need to have inheritable...
In original bemto, there was some subj stuff, like empty alt for images without any etc.
Not always we'd need to have _all the classnames_ to be handled as they're blocks. I think the best syntax for this would be the one that was used at...
Right now there is nothing, it would be a good idea to have some.
Right now the only supported syntax is the original BEM: `__` for elements and `_` for modifiers. It would be nice to have some ways to configure this. We can...
It is possible now, but won't work for all the cases like having the `ul>li>a` structure where the `li` would be multiplied, but all the props would go to `a`....