fix(TPopup): 弹出位置显示不正确

[teacher-zhou]

本次提交包含什么范围

• [fix]修复（对缺陷的修复）
• [feat]功能（新功能、特性的开发）
• [docs]文档（仅对当前版本的文档进行增加、完善和更新）
• [pref]性能（改进性能的代码更改）
• [refactor]重构（既不修复bug也不添加特性的代码更改）
• [style]风格（不影响代码含义的更改(空白、格式化、缺少分号等)
• [test]测试（添加缺失的测试或修改现有的测试）
• [build]编译（影响构建系统或外部依赖的更改）
• [ci]集成（对CI配置文件和脚本的更改）
• [others]其他，请说明：

参考 https://www.conventionalcommits.org/zh-hans/v1.0.0/

关联的 ISSUE 编号（一行一个）

Closing #255

[github-actions]

Unit Test Results

🟢  Tests Passed      |      ⏱️ 3.7s

📝 Total	✔️ Passed	❌ Failed	⚠️ Skipped
128	127	0	1

✏️ updated for commit 8322ac0

[github-actions]

查看测试结果 https://github.com/AchievedOwner/TDesignBlazor/runs/11946169954

[pull-request-quantifier-deprecated]

This PR has 8 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

---

Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +3 -5
Percentile : 3.2%

Total files changed: 1

Change summary by file extension:
.js : +3 -5

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

• Fast and predictable releases to production:
  • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
    iterations.
  • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
• Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
  • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
  • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
• Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
  • Small portions can be assimilated better.
• Better engineering practices are exercised:
  • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
  • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

• Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
  • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
  • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
• Change your engineering behaviors
  • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
    • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
    • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

• One line was added: +1 -0
• One line was deleted: +0 -1
• One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
  interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
• Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
  of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

---

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

[github-actions]

查看测试结果 https://github.com/AchievedOwner/TDesignBlazor/runs/11948813135