This PR changes the migration of `content` rules in the JS config to CSS codemods.
When a `content` rule is processed which matches files that are _also matched by the automatic content discovery in v4_, we do not need to emit CSS for that rule.
Take, for example this v3 configuration file:
```ts
import { type Config } from 'tailwindcss'
module.exports = {
content: [
'./src/**/*.{html,js}',
'./node_modules/my-external-lib/**/*.{html}'
],
} satisfies Config
```
Provided the base directories match up, the first rule will also be covered by the automatic content discovery in v4 and thus we only need to convert the second rule to CSS:
```css
@import "tailwindcss";
@source '../node_modules/my-external-lib/**/*.{html}';
```
This PR extends our JS configuration to CSS migration by also allowing `plugins` with options.
An example of such config would be:
```js
import { type Config } from 'tailwindcss'
import myPlugin from "./myPlugin";
export default {
plugins: [
myPlugin({
class: "tw",
}),
],
} satisfies Config;
```
If the option object contains only values allowed in our CSS API, we can convert this to CSS entirely:
```css
@plugin './myPlugin' {
class: 'tw';
}
```
With the changes in #14672, it now becomes trivial to actually resolve
the config (while still retaining the reset behavior). This means that
we can now convert JS configs that use _functions_, e.g.:
```ts
import { type Config } from 'tailwindcss'
export default {
theme: {
extend: {
colors: ({ colors }) => ({
gray: colors.neutral,
}),
},
},
} satisfies Config
```
This becomes:
```css
@import 'tailwindcss';
@theme {
--color-gray-50: #fafafa;
--color-gray-100: #f5f5f5;
--color-gray-200: #e5e5e5;
--color-gray-300: #d4d4d4;
--color-gray-400: #a3a3a3;
--color-gray-500: #737373;
--color-gray-600: #525252;
--color-gray-700: #404040;
--color-gray-800: #262626;
--color-gray-900: #171717;
--color-gray-950: #0a0a0a;
}
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Adam Wathan <adam.wathan@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Robin Malfait <malfait.robin@gmail.com>
This PR builds on top of the new [JS config to CSS
migration](https://github.com/tailwindlabs/tailwindcss/pull/14651) and
extends it to support migrating _static_ plugins.
What are _static_ plugins you might ask? Static plugins are plugins
where we can statically determine that these are coming from a different
file (so there is nothing inside the JS config that creates them). An
example for this is this config file:
```js
import typographyPlugin from '@tailwindcss/typography'
import { type Config } from 'tailwindcss'
export default {
content: ['./src/**/*.{js,jsx,ts,tsx}'],
darkMode: 'selector',
plugins: [typographyPlugin],
} satisfies Config
```
Here, the `plugins` array only has one element and it is a static import
from the `@tailwindcss/typography` module. In this PR we attempt to
parse the config file via Tree-sitter to extract the following
information from this file:
- What are the contents of the `plugins` array
- What are statically imported resources from the file
We then check if _all_ entries in the `plugins` array are either static
resources or _strings_ (something I saw working in some tests but I’m
not sure it still does). We migrate the JS config file to CSS if all
plugins are static and we can migrate them to CSS `@plugin` calls.
## Todo
This will need to be rebased after the updated tests in #14648
A few theme keys have changed in v4 relative to v3:
- `screens` -> `--breakpoint-*`
- `colors` -> `--color-*`
- `animation` -> `--animate-*`
- `borderRadius` -> `--radius-*`
- `boxShadow` -> `--shadow-*`
When using the `theme()` function we wouldn't pick up values from the
CSS for some of these. Likewise, when loading a v3 config not all of
these would be pushed back into the CSS theme and they should've been.
This PR addresses both of these problems.
This PR implements the first version of JS config file migration to CSS.
It is based on the most simple config setups we are using in the
Tailwind UI templates Commit, Primer, Radiant, and Studio.
The example we use in the integration test is a config that looks like
this:
```js
import { type Config } from 'tailwindcss'
import defaultTheme from 'tailwindcss/defaultTheme'
module.exports = {
darkMode: 'selector',
content: ['./src/**/*.{html,js}'],
theme: {
boxShadow: {
sm: '0 2px 6px rgb(15 23 42 / 0.08)',
},
colors: {
red: {
500: '#ef4444',
},
},
fontSize: {
xs: ['0.75rem', { lineHeight: '1rem' }],
sm: ['0.875rem', { lineHeight: '1.5rem' }],
base: ['1rem', { lineHeight: '2rem' }],
},
extend: {
colors: {
red: {
600: '#dc2626',
},
},
fontFamily: {
sans: 'Inter, system-ui, sans-serif',
display: ['Cabinet Grotesk', ...defaultTheme.fontFamily.sans],
},
borderRadius: {
'4xl': '2rem',
},
},
},
plugins: [],
} satisfies Config
```
As you can see, this file only has a `darkMode` selector, custom
`content` globs, a `theme` (with some theme keys being overwriting the
default theme and some others extending the defaults). Note that it does
not support `plugins` and/or `presets` yet.
In the case above, we will find the CSS file containing the existing
`@tailwind` directives and are migrating it to the following:
```css
@import 'tailwindcss';
@source './**/*.{html,js}';
@variant dark (&:where(.dark, .dark *));
@theme {
--box-shadow-*: initial;
--box-shadow-sm: 0 2px 6px rgb(15 23 42 / 0.08);
--color-*: initial;
--color-red-500: #ef4444;
--font-size-*: initial;
--font-size-xs: 0.75rem;
--font-size-xs--line-height: 1rem;
--font-size-sm: 0.875rem;
--font-size-sm--line-height: 1.5rem;
--font-size-base: 1rem;
--font-size-base--line-height: 2rem;
--color-red-600: #dc2626;
--font-family-sans: Inter, system-ui, sans-serif;
--font-family-display: Cabinet Grotesk, ui-sans-serif, system-ui, sans-serif, "Apple Color Emoji", "Segoe UI Emoji", "Segoe UI Symbol", "Noto Color Emoji";
--border-radius-4xl: 2rem;
}
```
This replicates all features of the JS config so we can even delete the
existing JS config in this case.
---------
Co-authored-by: Robin Malfait <malfait.robin@gmail.com>
This PR injects a `@config "…"` in the CSS file if a JS based config has
been found.
We will try to inject the `@config` in a sensible place:
1. Above the very first `@theme`
2. If that doesn't work, below the last `@import`
3. If that doesn't work, at the top of the file (as a last resort)
When a stylesheet is imported with `@import “…” layer(utilities)` that
means that all classes in that stylesheet and any of its imported
stylesheets become candidates for `@utility` conversion.
Doing this correctly requires us to place `@utility` rules into separate
stylesheets (usually) and replicate the import tree without layers as
`@utility` MUST be root-level. If a file consists of only utilities we
won't create a separate file for it and instead place the `@utility`
rules in the same stylesheet.
Been doing a LOT of pairing with @RobinMalfait on this one but I think
this is finally ready to be looked at
---------
Co-authored-by: Robin Malfait <malfait.robin@gmail.com>
This PR attempts to detect simple postcss setups: These are setups that
do not load dynamic modules and are based off the examples we are
[recommending in our
docs](https://tailwindcss.com/docs/installation/using-postcss). We
detect wether a config is appropriate by having it use the object plugin
config and by not requiring any other modules:
```js
module.exports = {
plugins: {
tailwindcss: {},
autoprefixer: {},
},
}
```
When we find such a config file, we will go over it line-by-line and
attempt to:
- Upgrade `tailwindcss:` to `'@tailwindcss/postcss':`
- Remove `autoprefixer` if used
We then attempt to install and remove the respective npm packages based
on the package manger we detect.
And since we now have logic to upgrade packages, this also makes sure to
install `tailwindcss@next` at the end of a sucessful migration.
---------
Co-authored-by: Robin Malfait <malfait.robin@gmail.com>
This PR fixes two issues we found when testing the candidate codemodes:
1. Sometimes, core would emit the same candidate twice. This would
result into rewriting a range multiple times, without realizing that
this change might already be applied, causing it to swallow or duplicate
some bytes.
2. The codemods were mutating the `Candidate` object, however since the
`Candidate` parsing is _cached_ in core, it would sometimes return the
same instance. This is an issue especially since we monkey patch the
prefix to `null` when migrating prefixed candidates. This means that a
candidate would be cached that would be _invalid relative to the real
design system_. We fixed this by making sure the mutations would only be
applied to clones of the `Candidate` and I changed the `DesignSystem`
API to return `ReadOnly<T>` versions of these candidates. A better
solution would maybe be to disable the cache at all but this requires
broader changes in Core.
In order to properly migrate your Tailwind CSS v3 project to v4, we need
access to the JavaScript configuration object. This was previously only
required for template migrations, but in this PR we're making it so that
this is also a prerequisite of the CSS migrations. This is because some
migrations, like `@apply`, also need to convert candidates that to the
v4 syntax and we need the full config in order to properly validate
them.
In addition to requiring a JS config, we also now attempt to
automatically find the right configuration file inside the current
working directory. This is now matching the behavior of the Tailwind CSS
v3 CLI where it will find the config automatically if it's in the
current directory and called `tailwind.conf.js`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Robin Malfait <malfait.robin@gmail.com>
This PR extracts all _candidate migrations_ from the existing _template
migrations_ and reuses these in the `@apply` CSS migration. Seems like
this _JustWorks✨_.
---------
Co-authored-by: Adam Wathan <adam.wathan@gmail.com>
This PR adds a new migration that can migrate Tailwind CSS v3 style
prefixes into Tailwind CSS v4.
The migration is split into three separate pieces of work:
1. Firstly, we need to read the full JavaScript config to get the _old_
prefix option. This is necessary because in v4, we will not allow things
like custom-separators for the prefix. From this option we will then try
and compute a new prefix (in 90% of the cases this is going to just
remove the trailing `-` but it can also work in more complex cases).
2. Then we migrate all Candidates. The important thing here is that we
need to operate on the raw candidate string because by relying on
`parseCandidate` (which we do for all other migrations) would not work,
as the candidates are not valid in v4 syntax. More on that in a bit.
3. Lastly we also make sure to update the CSS config to include the new
prefix. This is done by prepending the prefix option like so:
```css
@import "tailwindcss" prefix(tw);
```
### Migrating candidates
The main difference between v3 prefixes and v4 prefixes is that in v3,
the prefix was _part of the utility_ where as in v4 it is _always in
front of the CSS class.
So, for example, this candidate in v3:
```
hover:-tw-mr-4
```
Would be converted to the following in v4:
```
tw:hover:-mr-4
```
Since the first example _won't parse as a valid Candidate in v4, as the
`tw-mr` utility does not exist, we have to operate on the raw candidate
string first. To do this I created a fork of the `parseCandidate`
function _without any validation of utilities or variants_. This is used
to identify part of the candidate that is the `base` and then ensuring
the `base` starts with the old prefix. We then remove this to create an
"unprefixed" candidate that we validate against a version of the
DesignSystem _with no prefixes configured_. If the variant is valid this
way, we can then print it again with the `DesignSystem` that has the new
prefix to get the migrated version.
Since we set up the `DesignSystem` to include the new prefix, we can
also be certain that migrations that happen afterwards would still
disqualify candidates that aren't valid according to the new prefix
policy. This does mean we need to have the prefix fixup be the first
step in our pipeline.
One interesting bit is that in v3, arbitrary properties did not require
prefixes where as in v4 they do. So the following candidate:
```
[color:red]
```
Will be converted to:
```
tw:[color:red]
```
In v4, we're [removing automatic var
injection](https://github.com/tailwindlabs/tailwindcss/pull/13657)
(please refer to this PR for more detail as to why).
Automatic var injection made it so that if you have a candidate like
`bg-[--my-color]`, v3 would automatically wrap the content of the
arbitrary section with a `var(…)`, resulting in the same as typing
`bg-[var(--my-color)]`.
This PR adds codemods that go over various arbitrary fields and does the
`var(…)` injection for you. To be precise, we will add `var(…)` to:
- Modifiers, e.g.: `bg-red-500/[var(--my-opacity)]`
- Variants, e.g.: `supports-[var(--test)]:flex`
- Arbitrary candidates, e.g.: `[color:var(--my-color)]`
- Arbitrary values for functional candidates, e.g.:
`bg-[var(--my-color)]`
---------
Co-authored-by: Robin Malfait <malfait.robin@gmail.com>
This PR adds the initial setup and a first codemod for the template
migrations. These are a new set of migrations that operate on files
defined in the Tailwind v3 config as part of the `content` option (so
your HTML, JavaScript, TSX files etc.).
The migration for this is integrated in the new `@tailwindcss/upgrade`
package and will require pointing the migration to an input JavaScript
config file, like this:
```
npx @tailwindcss/upgrade --config tailwind.config.js
```
The idea of template migrations is to apply breaking changes from the v3
to v4 migration within your template files.
## Migrating !important syntax
The first migration that I’m adding with this PR is to ensure we use the
v4 important syntax that has the exclamation mark at the end of the
utility.
For example, this:
```html
<div class="!flex sm:!block"></div>
```
Will now turn into:
```html
<div class="flex! sm:block!"></div>
```
## Architecture considerations
Implementation wise, we make use of Oxide to scan the content files fast
and efficiently. By relying on the same scanner als Tailwind v4, we
guarantee that all candidates that are part of the v4 output will have
gone through a migration.
Migrations itself operate on the abstract `Candidate` type, similar to
the type we use in the v4 codebase. It will parse the candidate into its
parts so they can easily be introspected/modified. Migrations are typed
as:
```ts
type TemplateMigration = (candidate: Candidate) => Candidate | null
```
`null` should be returned if the `Candidate` does not need a migration.
We currently use the v4 `parseCandidate` function to get an abstract
definition of the candidate rule that we can operate on. _This will
likely need to change in the future as we need to fork `parseCandidate`
for v3 specific syntax_.
Additionally, we're inlining a `printCandidate` function that can
stringify the abstract `Candidate` type. It is not guaranteed that this
is an identity function since some information can be lost during the
parse step. This is not a problem though, because migrations will only
run selectively and if none of the selectors trigger, the candidates are
not updated. h/t to @RobinMalfait for providing the printer.
So the overall flow of a migration looks like this:
- Scan the config file for `content` files
- Use Oxide to extract a list of candidate and their positions from
these `content` files
- Run a few migrations that operate on the `Candidate` abstract type.
- Print the updated `Candidate` back into the original `content` file.
---------
Co-authored-by: Robin Malfait <malfait.robin@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Jordan Pittman <jordan@cryptica.me>
