In v4, we're making room for more gradient primitives with the addition
of [gradient and conic gradient
utilities](https://github.com/tailwindlabs/tailwindcss/pull/14467). To
make this clearer, we are renaming all v3 `bg-gradient-*` utilities to
`bg-linear-*` to make it clear that these refer to linear gradients.
This PR adds a migration that will automatically update the class names
based on this migration.
This PR fixes an issue where a CSS rule with a selector that contains
multiple selectors lost everything but the last selector.
While testing the `npx @tailwindcss/upgrade` codemods on real world
projects, I noticed that we lost one of the selectors in the
`docker/docs` repository.
```diff
diff --git a/assets/css/toc.css b/assets/css/toc.css
index 91ff92d7cd..3b2432e913 100644
--- a/assets/css/toc.css
+++ b/assets/css/toc.css
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
#TableOfContents {
.toc a {
@apply block max-w-full truncate py-1 pl-2 hover:font-medium hover:no-underline;
- &[aria-current="true"],
+
&:hover {
@apply border-l-2 border-l-gray-light bg-gradient-to-r from-gray-light-100 font-medium text-black dark:border-l-gray-dark dark:from-gray-dark-200 dark:text-white;
}
```
This PR fixes the issue by not overriding the `node.selector` internally
with the last selector we handled. Instead, we let the selector parser
handle it entirely.
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>
When CSS exists between two tailwind directives, then the CSS will be
wrapped in an `@layer` to ensure it all ends up in the correct location
in the final CSS file.
However, if the only thing between two tailwind directives is a comment,
then the comment will also be wrapped in an `@layer` directive.
E.g.:
```css
@tailwind base;
/* This is a comment */
@tailwind components;
/* This is another comment */
@tailwind utilities;
```
Results in:
```css
@import "tailwindcss";
@layer base {
/* This is a comment */
}
@layer components {
/* This is another comment */
}
```
In this case, the layers don't matter, so this can be simplified to:
```css
@import "tailwindcss";
/* This is a comment */
/* This is another comment */
```
This PR fixes an issue where some `@import` at-rules had an empty
`layer()` attached at the end of the `@import` string.
We should only add that if a Tailwind directive or Tailwind import such
as `@tailwind base` or `@import "tailwindcss/base"` preceded the current
`@import` at-rule. If there was no Tailwind directive, the `lastLayer`
will be empty and we don't need to attach it to the `@import` string.
This PR improves the missing layers codemod where everything after the
last Tailwind directive can stay as-is without wrapping it in a `@layer`
directive.
The `@layer` at-rules are only important for CSS that exists between
Tailwind directives.
E.g.:
```css
@tailwind base;
html {}
@tailwind components;
.btn {}
@tailwind utilities;
.foo {}
.bar {}
```
Was transformed into:
```css
@import "tailwindcss";
@layer base {
html {}
}
@layer components {
.btn {}
}
@layer utilities {
.foo {}
.bar {}
}
```
But the last `@layer utilities` is already in the correct spot, so we
can simplify this to just this instead:
```css
@import "tailwindcss";
@layer base {
html {}
}
@layer components {
.btn {}
}
.foo {}
.bar {}
```
This PR adds a codemod that ensures that some parts of your stylesheet
are wrapped in an `@layer`.
This is a follow-up PR of #14411, in that PR we migrate `@tailwind`
directives to imports.
As a quick summary, that will turn this:
```css
@tailwind base;
@tailwind components;
@tailwind utilities;
```
Into:
```css
@import 'tailwindcss';
```
But there are a few issues with that _if_ we have additional CSS on the
page. For example let's imagine we had this:
```css
@tailwind base;
body {
background-color: red;
}
@tailwind components;
.btn {}
@tailwind utilities;
```
This will now be turned into:
```css
@import 'tailwindcss';
body {
background-color: red;
}
.btn {}
```
But in v4 we use real layers, in v3 we used to replace the directive
with the result of that layer. This means that now the `body` and `.btn`
styles are in the incorrect spot.
To solve this, we have to wrap them in a layer. The `body` should go in
an `@layer base`, and the `.btn` should be in an `@layer components` to
make sure it's in the same spot as it was before.
That's what this PR does, the original input will now be turned into:
```css
@import 'tailwindcss';
@layer base {
body {
background-color: red;
}
}
@layer components {
.btn {
}
}
```
There are a few internal refactors going on as well, but those are less
important.
This PR adds CSS codemods for migrating existing `@layer utilities` to
`@utility` directives.
This PR has the ability to migrate the following cases:
---
The most basic case is when you want to migrate a simple class to a
utility directive.
Input:
```css
@layer utilities {
.foo {
color: red;
}
.bar {
color: blue;
}
}
```
Output:
```css
@utility foo {
color: red;
}
@utility bar {
color: blue;
}
```
You'll notice that the class `foo` will be used as the utility name, the
declarations (and the rest of the body of the rule) will become the body
of the `@utility` definition.
---
In v3, every class in a selector will become a utility. To correctly
migrate this to `@utility` directives, we have to register each class in
the selector and generate `n` utilities.
We can use nesting syntax, and replace the current class with `&` to
ensure that the final result behaves the same.
Input:
```css
@layer utilities {
.foo .bar .baz {
color: red;
}
}
```
Output:
```css
@utility foo {
& .bar .baz {
color: red;
}
}
@utility bar {
.foo & .baz {
color: red;
}
}
@utility .baz {
.foo .bar & {
color: red;
}
}
```
In this case, it could be that you know that some of them will never be
used as a utility (e.g.: `hover:bar`), but then you can safely remove
them.
---
Even classes inside of `:has(…)` will become a utility. The only
exception to the rule is that we don't do it for `:not(…)`.
Input:
```css
@layer utilities {
.foo .bar:not(.qux):has(.baz) {
display: none;
}
}
```
Output:
```css
@utility foo {
& .bar:not(.qux):has(.baz) {
display: none;
}
}
@utility bar {
.foo &:not(.qux):has(.baz) {
display: none;
}
}
@utility baz {
.foo .bar:not(.qux):has(&) {
display: none;
}
}
```
Notice that there is no `@utility qux` because it was used inside of
`:not(…)`.
---
When classes are nested inside at-rules, then these classes will also
become utilities. However, the `@utility <name>` will be at the top and
the at-rules will live inside of it. If there are multiple classes
inside a shared at-rule, then the at-rule will be duplicated for each
class.
Let's look at an example to make it more clear:
Input:
```css
@layer utilities {
@media (min-width: 640px) {
.foo {
color: red;
}
.bar {
color: blue;
}
@media (min-width: 1024px) {
.baz {
color: green;
}
@media (min-width: 1280px) {
.qux {
color: yellow;
}
}
}
}
}
```
Output:
```css
@utility foo {
@media (min-width: 640px) {
color: red;
}
}
@utility bar {
@media (min-width: 640px) {
color: blue;
}
}
@utility baz {
@media (min-width: 640px) {
@media (min-width: 1024px) {
color: green;
}
}
}
@utility qux {
@media (min-width: 640px) {
@media (min-width: 1024px) {
@media (min-width: 1280px) {
color: yellow;
}
}
}
}
```
---
When classes result in multiple `@utility` directives with the same
name, then the definitions will be merged together.
Input:
```css
@layer utilities {
.no-scrollbar::-webkit-scrollbar {
display: none;
}
.no-scrollbar {
-ms-overflow-style: none;
scrollbar-width: none;
}
}
```
Intermediate representation:
```css
@utility no-scrollbar {
&::-webkit-scrollbar {
display: none;
}
}
@utility no-scrollbar {
-ms-overflow-style: none;
scrollbar-width: none;
}
```
Output:
```css
@utility no-scrollbar {
&::-webkit-scrollbar {
display: none;
}
-ms-overflow-style: none;
scrollbar-width: none
}
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Jordan Pittman <jordan@cryptica.me>
This PR adds CSS codemods for migrating existing `@tailwind` directives
to the new alternatives.
This PR has the ability to migrate the following cases:
---
Typical default usage of `@tailwind` directives in v3.
Input:
```css
@tailwind base;
@tailwind components;
@tailwind utilities;
```
Output:
```css
@import 'tailwindcss';
```
---
Similar as above, but always using `@import` instead of `@import`
directly.
Input:
```css
@import 'tailwindcss/base';
@import 'tailwindcss/components';
@import 'tailwindcss/utilities';
```
Output:
```css
@import 'tailwindcss';
```
---
When you are _only_ using `@tailwind base`:
Input:
```css
@tailwind base;
```
Output:
```css
@import 'tailwindcss/theme' layer(theme);
@import 'tailwindcss/preflight' layer(base);
```
---
When you are _only_ using `@tailwind utilities`:
Input:
```css
@tailwind utilities;
```
Output:
```css
@import 'tailwindcss/utilities' layer(utilities);
```
---
If the default order changes (aka, `@tailwind utilities` was defined
_before_ `@tailwind base`), then an additional `@layer` will be added to
the top to re-define the default order.
Input:
```css
@tailwind utilities;
@tailwind base;
```
Output:
```css
@layer theme, components, utilities, base;
@import 'tailwindcss';
```
---
When you are _only_ using `@tailwind base; @tailwind utilities;`:
Input:
```css
@tailwind base;
@tailwind utilities;
```
Output:
```css
@import 'tailwindcss';
```
We currently don't have a concept of `@tailwind components` in v4, so if
you are not using `@tailwind components`, we can expand to the default
`@import 'tailwindcss';` instead of the individual imports.
---
`@tailwind screens` and `@tailwind variants` are not supported/necessary
in v4, so we can safely remove them.
Input:
```css
@tailwind screens;
@tailwind variants;
```
Output:
```css
```
This PR adds some initial tooling for codemods. We are currently only
interested in migrating CSS files, so we will be using PostCSS under the
hood to do this. This PR also implements the "migrate `@apply`" codemod
from #14412.
The usage will look like this:
```sh
npx @tailwindcss/upgrade
```
You can pass in CSS files to transform as arguments:
```sh
npx @tailwindcss/upgrade src/**/*.css
```
But, if none are provided, it will search for CSS files in the current
directory and its subdirectories.
```
≈ tailwindcss v4.0.0-alpha.24
│ No files provided. Searching for CSS files in the current
│ directory and its subdirectories…
│ Migration complete. Verify the changes and commit them to
│ your repository.
```
The tooling also requires the Git repository to be in a clean state.
This is a common convention to ensure that everything is undo-able. If
we detect that the git repository is dirty, we will abort the migration.
```
≈ tailwindcss v4.0.0-alpha.24
│ Git directory is not clean. Please stash or commit your
│ changes before migrating.
│ You may use the `--force` flag to override this safety
│ check.
```
---
This PR alsoo adds CSS codemods for migrating existing `@apply`
directives to the new version.
This PR has the ability to migrate the following cases:
---
In v4, the convention is to put the important modifier `!` at the end of
the utility class instead of right before it. This makes it easier to
reason about, especially when you are variants.
Input:
```css
.foo {
@apply !flex flex-col! hover:!items-start items-center;
}
```
Output:
```css
.foo {
@apply flex! flex-col! hover:items-start! items-center;
}
```
---
In v4 we don't support `!important` as a marker at the end of `@apply`
directives. Instead, you can append the `!` to each utility class to
make it `!important`.
Input:
```css
.foo {
@apply flex flex-col !important;
}
```
Output:
```css
.foo {
@apply flex! flex-col!;
}
```
