fix selected multiple when option is no object #6557
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this PR do?
This PR fixes #6515 by checking if the option is truly an object before accessing it's property.
Where should the reviewer start?
Look at
src/js/components/Select/utils.jsWhat testing has been done on this PR?
I added
valueKey={{ key: 'value', reduce: true }}onselect all and cleartestHow should this be manually tested?
By creating something similar to https://codesandbox.io/s/grommet-v2-template-forked-l8b45k?file=/index.js
Do Jest tests follow these best practices?
screenis used for querying.userEventis used in place offireEvent.asFragment()is used for snapshot testing.Any background context you want to provide?
What are the relevant issues?
#6515
Screenshots (if appropriate)
Do the grommet docs need to be updated?
No
Should this PR be mentioned in the release notes?
I don't think so because it's a bug 🤔
Is this change backwards compatible or is it a breaking change?
It's compatible