Nested selector redundancy on merge

[geedmo]

Using nested selector, when merging it result in CSS with redundant declarations.

Example

.right {
  margin-left: 100%;
  .active {
    margin-left: 0;
  }
}
.bottom {
  margin-bottom: 100%;
  .active {
    margin-bottom: 0;
  }
}
/* merged */
.bottom-right { 
 .bottom;
 .right;
}

Generated code merges fine the parent selector rules, but nested selector has a redundant declaration

.right {
  margin-left: 100%;
}
.right .active {
  margin-left: 0;
}
.bottom {
  margin-bottom: 100%;
}
.bottom .active {
  margin-bottom: 0;
}
/* merged ok */
.bottom-right {
  margin-bottom: 100%;
  margin-left: 100%;
}
/* redundant */
.bottom-right .active {
  margin-bottom: 0;
}
.bottom-right .active {
  margin-left: 0;
}

Tested with all versions online at http://less2css.org/

[geedmo]

Because there is no comments or ideas on this ..
The expected behavior should be

/* not redundant */
.bottom-right .active {
  margin-bottom: 0;
  margin-left: 0;
}

[lukeapage]

work-around - use extend and that removes duplicates for properties

[lukeapage]

This was a feature request on the css compressor I was looking at.. we could look at using that to simplify us having to do it (assuming we switch compressors and they implement)

[seven-phases-max]

If I understand it right it's not really a bug (at least in context of today's Less approach). Either way, currently .bottom-right .active selectors will be merged with --clean-option=--advanced (--clean-css=--advanced in v2?) option so technically this has some chances to be closed (unless someone is going to implement some kind of deeper optimizations in the core itself in the foreseeable future).

[seven-phases-max]

Oh wait, in fact it's just a duplicate of #930. So I'm closing this.