fix(raw): preserve insertbefore fragment order - #230
Open
Nagi-Inaba wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
Nagi-Inaba
marked this pull request as ready for review
July 16, 2026 13:55
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Summary
raw-set --action insertbeforeA, B, Cto be written asC, B, ARoot cause
XElement.AddBeforeSelfinserts each element immediately before the same anchor while retaining previously inserted siblings. Iterating the fragment in reverse therefore persisted the reverse of the caller-supplied order.User impact
Raw XML edits using
insertbeforeno longer silently reorder the supplied fragment.Validation
Built the current source with .NET SDK 10.0.302:
Ran the same command-level reproduction before and after the change against a disposable DOCX:
The build still reports one pre-existing nullable warning in
ExcelHandler.SheetShift.cs:538; this change introduces no new warning.Fixes #222