Conversation
요약이 풀 요청은 카드 리스트 컴포넌트의 반응형 레이아웃 개선과 스크립트 실행 방식의 간소화를 포함합니다. CardList 컴포넌트는 고정된 4열 그리드에서 기본 2열, 중간 화면 이상에서 4열로 반응하는 그리드로 변경되었습니다. LinkCard 컴포넌트는 고정 크기 클래스에서 종횡비 기반의 반응형 클래스로 전환되었습니다. 또한 pre-commit 훅과 package.json의 lint 스크립트에서 Walkthroughpre-commit 훅과 package.json의 Possibly related PRs
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🤖 Fix all issues with AI agents
In `@src/components/basics/LinkCard/LinkCard.tsx`:
- Line 30: In LinkCard.tsx update the className on the root element: replace the
erroneous Tailwind token "flexs" with "flex" so the flex layout and "flex-col"
take effect; locate the className string in the LinkCard component and make that
single-token change.
- Around line 45-53: The Tailwind utilities used in LinkCard.tsx (aspect-94/47,
aspect-94/69, aspect-47/58, max-w-94) are not defined in the theme; update the
className strings in the LinkCard component to use Tailwind arbitrary-value
syntax (e.g., aspect-[94/47], aspect-[94/69], aspect-[47/58], max-w-[94px]) so
the aspect-ratio and max-width resolve correctly, keeping the same class
ordering and other classes (e.g., replace in the divs that currently use
aspect-94/47, aspect-94/69 and max-w-94).
Bangdayeon
force-pushed
the
refactor/#350-modify-card-list-grid
branch
from
936b11b to
35b65a4
Compare
Bangdayeon
force-pushed
the
refactor/#350-modify-card-list-grid
branch
from
35b65a4 to
801bb4e
Compare
Bangdayeon
changed the title
|
현 PR에서 머지 후 테스트 필요한게 어떤게 있을까요 @Bangdayeon |
본문 수정을 못했네요. 수정했습니다. |
Bangdayeon
force-pushed
the
refactor/#350-modify-card-list-grid
branch
from
801bb4e to
45f21c0
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Caution
Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.
⚠️ Outside diff range comments (1)
src/app/(route)/all-link/AllLink.tsx (1)
58-69:⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 Minor
CardList의no-scrollbar클래스가 현재 구조에서 불필요합니다.
CardList는overflow속성 없이 순수 그리드 컨테이너(grid grid-cols-2 gap-4 md:grid-cols-4)로 렌더링됩니다. 스크롤은 부모div(Line 49,overflow-y-auto)에서 처리되므로,CardList의no-scrollbar클래스는 스크롤바를 숨길 대상이 없어 효과가 없습니다.
CardList.tsx에서 하드코딩된no-scrollbar클래스는 제거하거나, 향후CardList자체가 overflow 컨테이너가 되는 경우를 대비해 조건부 적용 가능하도록prop이나variant로 변경하는 것을 권장합니다.🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@src/app/`(route)/all-link/AllLink.tsx around lines 58 - 69, The CardList component is currently emitting a hardcoded "no-scrollbar" class which is ineffective here because scrolling is handled by the parent; open CardList.tsx and remove the hardcoded "no-scrollbar" class (or replace it with a conditional prop/variant such as hideScrollbar:boolean or variant="no-scrollbar" that toggles the class) so callers like AllLink.tsx (where CardList wraps LinkCard items) don't receive an unnecessary class; if you add a prop, update usages accordingly (e.g., remove any prop usage in AllLink.tsx) and ensure the default behavior is unchanged when the prop is omitted.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In `@src/components/basics/LinkCard/LinkCard.tsx`:
- Line 53: In LinkCard (the div with className "flex aspect-94/69 w-full flex-1
flex-col justify-between p-3") there is a conflict between flex-1 and
aspect-94/69 that can break height calculation; update that element in
LinkCard.tsx to use only one sizing approach—either remove "flex-1" if you want
the fixed aspect ratio ("aspect-94/69") to control height, or remove
"aspect-94/69" if you want the flex layout to allocate remaining height—then
ensure the remaining classes ("flex", "w-full", "flex-col", "justify-between",
"p-3") remain intact.
---
Outside diff comments:
In `@src/app/`(route)/all-link/AllLink.tsx:
- Around line 58-69: The CardList component is currently emitting a hardcoded
"no-scrollbar" class which is ineffective here because scrolling is handled by
the parent; open CardList.tsx and remove the hardcoded "no-scrollbar" class (or
replace it with a conditional prop/variant such as hideScrollbar:boolean or
variant="no-scrollbar" that toggles the class) so callers like AllLink.tsx
(where CardList wraps LinkCard items) don't receive an unnecessary class; if you
add a prop, update usages accordingly (e.g., remove any prop usage in
AllLink.tsx) and ensure the default behavior is unchanged when the prop is
omitted.
ℹ️ Review info
Configuration used: Repository UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (6)
.husky/pre-commitpackage.jsonsrc/app/(route)/all-link/AllLink.tsxsrc/components/basics/CardList/CardList.tsxsrc/components/basics/LinkCard/LinkCard.tsxsrc/styles/globals.css
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
- src/components/basics/CardList/CardList.tsx
- package.json
- .husky/pre-commit
| /> | ||
| </div> | ||
| <div className="flex flex-1 flex-col justify-between p-3"> | ||
| <div className="flex aspect-94/69 w-full flex-1 flex-col justify-between p-3"> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧩 Analysis chain
🏁 Script executed:
# 파일 존재 여부 및 라인 53 확인
cat -n src/components/basics/LinkCard/LinkCard.tsx | sed -n '45,60p'Repository: Team-SoFa/linkiving
Length of output: 865
🏁 Script executed:
# 제안된 검증: flex-1과 aspect-* 유틸리티가 함께 쓰인 클래스 문자열 탐색
rg -n 'flex-1.*aspect-|aspect-.*flex-1' --type tsx --type ts --type jsxRepository: Team-SoFa/linkiving
Length of output: 90
🏁 Script executed:
# 추가 확인: aspect-94/69의 정의 또는 사용 패턴 확인
rg -n 'aspect-94/69' --type tsx --type ts --type jsxRepository: Team-SoFa/linkiving
Length of output: 90
🏁 Script executed:
# flex-1과 aspect-* 조합 찾기 (파일 확장자 기반)
rg 'flex-1.*aspect-|aspect-.*flex-1' '.' -g '*.tsx' -g '*.ts' -g '*.jsx' -g '*.js'Repository: Team-SoFa/linkiving
Length of output: 193
🌐 Web query:
flex-1 aspect-ratio conflict tailwind css flexbox height priority
💡 Result:
In CSS/Tailwind, flex-1 and aspect-* can “fight” because they each try to determine the item’s used size:
flex-1in Tailwind sets the flex item toflex: 1 1 0%(i.e., it forces the main-axis size to be space-distributed starting from a 0 basis). In flexbox, the used flex-basis drives the item’s main-size calculation;flex-basis:autowould instead use the item’swidth/heightif set. (This is why changing basis changes sizing behavior.) [3][4]aspect-ratioonly constrains size when one dimension is “auto” (e.g., width is resolved, then height can be derived, or vice‑versa). If flexbox (or stretching) makes the “other” dimension definite, the ratio may appear ignored. [2]- A very common gotcha: flex containers default to
align-items: stretch, so items get a stretched cross-size. When that happens, the “tallest” item can effectively dictate the row height, and other items won’t present their intended aspect ratio. Switching away from stretch (e.g.items-start) lets the item’s height beautoagain so the aspect ratio can apply. [1]
Practical Tailwind fixes (pick the intent)
- You want the item to keep its ratio (don’t stretch its height):
<div class="flex items-start">
<div class="flex-1 aspect-video bg-gray-200"></div>
</div>items-start (or self-start) is the key. [1]
- You want flex growth, but also want width/height you set to matter more:
- Prefer
basis-auto(or don’t useflex-1) so the basis comes fromw-*/h-*instead of0%. This aligns with howflex-basis:autouses the main-size property. [3][4]
- You want it to fill available height, and compute width from ratio:
- Make height definite on the flex item/parent (
h-full/h-screen/ etc.), keep widthauto, and useaspect-*so width derives from height. (This follows howaspect-ratioparticipates in sizing when a dimension is definite and the other is auto.) [2]
Sources:
[1] https://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2021/05/aspectratio.html
[2] https://css-tricks.com/almanac/properties/a/aspect-ratio/
[3] https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/CSS/CSS_flexible_box_layout/Controlling_ratios_of_flex_items_along_the_main_axis
[4] https://www.w3.org/TR/css-flexbox-1/
flex-1과 aspect-94/69가 동일 요소에 공존하여 레이아웃 충돌 가능성이 있습니다.
부모가 flex-col이고 카드 전체 높이는 aspect-47/58로 고정된 상태에서, 이 요소에 flex-1(남은 공간을 채우도록 높이 결정)과 aspect-94/69(너비 기반으로 높이 결정)가 동시에 적용되면 두 속성이 높이(main axis)를 각각 다르게 지정하려 합니다. Flexbox에서 flex-1은 flex-basis: 0%로 작동하여 높이 분배를 우선하고, 이로 인해 aspect-ratio가 의도한 대로 적용되지 않을 가능성이 있습니다.
aspect-94/69가 실제 레이아웃에 필요하다면 flex-1 제거를 검토하거나, flex-1으로 충분히 높이를 채우는 구조라면 aspect-94/69 제거를 확인하세요.
🔍 확인을 위한 제안 (flex-1만 사용하는 경우)
- <div className="flex aspect-94/69 w-full flex-1 flex-col justify-between p-3">
+ <div className="flex w-full flex-1 flex-col justify-between p-3">🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
In `@src/components/basics/LinkCard/LinkCard.tsx` at line 53, In LinkCard (the div
with className "flex aspect-94/69 w-full flex-1 flex-col justify-between p-3")
there is a conflict between flex-1 and aspect-94/69 that can break height
calculation; update that element in LinkCard.tsx to use only one sizing
approach—either remove "flex-1" if you want the fixed aspect ratio
("aspect-94/69") to control height, or remove "aspect-94/69" if you want the
flex layout to allocate remaining height—then ensure the remaining classes
("flex", "w-full", "flex-col", "justify-between", "p-3") remain intact.
|
코드래빗 리뷰 확인부탁드립니다 @Bangdayeon |
2 participants
관련 이슈
PR 설명