This adds an assertion checking for duplicate items whenever we create an item, and when we merge an item into the final list.
I had to disable tracking for the anonymous inner list for nsDisplayPerspective and nsDisplayTransform (and manually forward RemoveFrame to them), as well as skipping the assertion for multi-page (since we can end up duplicating wrap lists, but isn't a problem, since we don't retain these).
MozReview-Commit-ID: 4n6rx9bQNan
This adds an assertion checking for duplicate items whenever we create an item, and when we merge an item into the final list.
I had to disable tracking for the anonymous inner list for nsDisplayPerspective and nsDisplayTransform (and manually forward RemoveFrame to them), as well as skipping the assertion for multi-page (since we can end up duplicating wrap lists, but isn't a problem, since we don't retain these).
MozReview-Commit-ID: 4n6rx9bQNan
Our implementation is totally not what the spec says, but totally what other
UAs do, see https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2474.
So given this is causing webcompat pain, I think we should be pragmatic and just
unprefix this.
We could keep serialization and getComputedStyle with ::selection working with a
bit more effort, like we do for :-moz-placeholder, but I'd prefer not doing at
least the serialization bit, and just alias in nsCSSPseudoElements
:-moz-selection to selection too.
MozReview-Commit-ID: 6lxctozRDqv
The test invalidates the z-index element, so that we do a partial build with just that and the DAG no longer knows the relative ordering between it and the other blue elements.
We then expand the size of the 'first' elements stacking context, and ensure that we provide enough intersecting items to know that we're on top of the z-index element.
MozReview-Commit-ID: KP7c3bnwfBd
* * *
[mq]: fix
MozReview-Commit-ID: EuraqvaUS35
This method is not a virtual call, and also looks nicer.
This patch was mostly generated by a Python script, but I manually
cleaned up the code in a few places where statements didn't need to be
split across multiple lines any more.
MozReview-Commit-ID: 8JExxqSRc59
This brings us into alignment with the spec and makes us pass some web-platform
tests, along with the reftests that I've included for this bug.
MozReview-Commit-ID: KoKPi18svGE
This patch doesn't change behavior.
It simply makes us share code/data for two different cases that both ended up
producing mainAxisCoord->GetUnit() == eStyleUnit_Auto. Now, they'll *both* use
the same static nsStyleCoord to represent this "auto" value.
Originally, in one of these cases ("flex-basis:auto;[main-size-property]:auto),
we left the mainAxisCoord untouched. Now we'll point it at this dummy 'auto'
value. Either way we end up with mainAxisCoord->GetUnit() == eStyleUnit_Auto,
so the behavior doesn't change.
The next patch in this series will make further changes to one of these spots,
as noted in the "XXXdholbert" code-comment included here.
MozReview-Commit-ID: 5ClfbNHuKhO
This is needed only for CSS Grid since in other cases we're
only using IntrinsicISizeOffsets in the inline-axis and
the percentage basis is always indefinite for *intrinsic
sizing*. When calculating the intrinsic size of grid items
in the grid container's block axis however, we do have
a definite size for the grid area in the inline-axis and it
should be used per:
https://drafts.csswg.org/css-grid/#algo-overview
"2. Next, the track sizing algorithm resolves the sizes of
the grid rows, using the grid column sizes calculated in
the previous step."
(Percentage padding/margin for grid items is always resolved
against the grid area's inline-size nowadays.)
This is mostly code removal, changing GetDisplayContentsStyle(..) checks by an
FFI call to Servo.
The tricky parts are:
* MaybeCreateLazily, which I fixed to avoid setting bits under display: none
stuff. This was a pre-existing problem, which was wallpapered by the
sc->IsInDisplayNoneSubtree() check, which effectively made the whole
assertion useless (see bug 1381017 for the only crashtest that hit this
though).
* ContentRemoved, where we can no longer know for sure whether the element is
actually display: contents if we're removing it as a response to a style
change. See the comment there. That kinda sucks, but that case is relatively
weird, and it's better than adding tons of complexity to handle that.
* GetParentComputedStyle, which also has a comment there. Also, this function
has only one caller now, so we should maybe try to remove it.
The different assertions after DestroyFramesForAndRestyle are changed for a
single assertion in the function itself, and the node bit used as an
optimization to avoid hashtable lookups is taken back.
MozReview-Commit-ID: AZm822QnhF9
When we finish decoding an image frame, we need to trigger reflow for the
frame containing a float with shape-outside: <image>, and delay the firing
of the document's onload event until that reflow is complete.
This patch adds three test cases;
1) Animation on position:absolute element in a zero-height iframe
This animation should be throttled.
2) Animation on a non-zero width and hight position:absolute element but whose
parent has a zero height
This animation should NOT be throttled since the animation is visible
3) Animation on a zero-height position:absolute element whose parent also has
zero height.
This animation should be throttled since the animation is invisible
The first test fails without this fix and passes with the fix.
The second one passes regardless of the fix
The third one is marked as 'todo' since it doesn't pass with this fix.
MozReview-Commit-ID: 8pNUFQ71ivj
BACKGROUND:
Early in flex layout, we have to resolve the 'flex-basis' value to produce the
"flex base size" (basically, the flex-basis resolved to an absolute length).
This resolution happens in two "phases" (which both happen within
nsFlexContainer::GenerateFlexItemForChild()):
First phase: we try to resolve the flex-basis by creating a ReflowInput for the
flex item (which gets us some other things as well). Under the hood, we use
the flex-basis when resolving this ReflowInput's main-axis size. The code for
this lives in nsFrame::ComputeSize (and in
nsFrame::ComputeSizeWithIntrinsicDimensions, via some frame classes' overrides of
ComputeSize).
Second phase: If the first phase didn't get us a definite size, then that means
we have to do reflow to measure the content size & produce a resolved flex base
size, which we do via ResolveAutoFlexBasisAndMinSize().
NOTES ON THIS PATCH:
To add 'flex-basis:content' support to layout, this patch only needs to modify
the first phase discussed above. If it turns out we also have some second-phase
work to do (i.e. if we need to do reflow to resolve 'flex-basis:content'), this
patch causes that reflow to happen by simply making us use eStyleUnit_Auto in
the main axis's nsStyleCoord in the first phase. (And then, if that 'auto'
nsStyleCoord really does require reflow, then that first phase will end up
producing an unconstrained main-size in the flex item's ReflowInput, which will
automatically trigger the second phase.)
MozReview-Commit-ID: 2nH4Fh78C81
