layout: Refactor box size computation #34671
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
🔨 Triggering try run (#12379836631) for Linux WPT |
|
Test results for linux-wpt-layout-2020 from try job (#12379836631): Flaky unexpected result (24)
Stable unexpected results that are known to be intermittent (14)
Stable unexpected results (46)
|
|
|
c3c6875 to
ddef0a3
Compare
|
🤖 Opened new upstream WPT pull request (web-platform-tests/wpt#49748) with upstreamable changes. |
|
🔨 Triggering try run (#12383519621) for Linux WPT |
|
📝 Transplanted new upstreamable changes to existing upstream WPT pull request (web-platform-tests/wpt#49748). |
|
Test results for linux-wpt-layout-2020 from try job (#12383519621): Flaky unexpected result (21)
Stable unexpected results that are known to be intermittent (12)
|
|
✨ Try run (#12383519621) succeeded. |
|
Why do the It feels like the interface between layout algorithms is getting quite big. |
|
What code are you referring to, exactly? This isn't passing any new data, it's just reorganizing a few places that had 3 The data that is passed to the child is typically a |
nicoburns
reviewed
Dec 18, 2024
Comment on lines
-1964
to
+1975
| LogicalVec2 { | ||
| inline: Size::Numeric(inline_size), | ||
| block: block_size.non_auto().map_or(Size::Initial, Size::Numeric), | ||
| }, | ||
| flex_axis | ||
| .vec2_to_flow_relative(self.content_min_size) | ||
| .map(|size| Size::Numeric(*size)), | ||
| flex_axis | ||
| .vec2_to_flow_relative(self.content_max_size) | ||
| .map(|size| size.map_or(Size::Initial, Size::Numeric)), | ||
| &Sizes::new( | ||
| block_size.non_auto().map_or(Size::Initial, Size::Numeric), | ||
| Size::Numeric(min_size.block), | ||
| max_size.block.map_or(Size::Initial, Size::Numeric), | ||
| ), | ||
| &Sizes::new( | ||
| Size::Numeric(inline_size), | ||
| Size::Numeric(min_size.inline), | ||
| max_size.inline.map_or(Size::Initial, Size::Numeric), | ||
| ), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Loirooriol I'm referring to things like this code. Does the replaced box not know it's own min- and max- sizes?
I realise this isn't introduced in this PR. But I was just wondering whether we could eliminate these parameters entirely so that we don't need a new type to cut down on the boilerplate.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well, yes, that's what used_size_as_if_inline_element() does: it takes the computed values from the style and resolves them with the containing block.
In this case flexbox is using used_size_as_if_inline_element_from_content_box_sizes which is like a lower-level API. I think the reasons were that it already has the data (so no need to resolve percentages again and such) and also to handle automatic minimums, which are typically zero but not in flexbox.
That said I still haven't implemented sizing keywords for flexbox so this may need to change a bit.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think the reasons were that it already has the data (so no need to resolve percentages again and such) and also to handle automatic minimums, which are typically zero but not in flexbox.
I think I'd be more inclined to keep the interface simple here as I feel like the performance gains are probably quite minor. But I we sort this out (either way) later :)
nicoburns
approved these changes
Dec 18, 2024
in each layout logic, in order to correctly resolve sizing keywords. This patch adds a new `Sizes` struct which holds the preferred, min and max sizing values for one axis, and unifies the logic to resolve the final size into there. Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
ddef0a3 to
fbcd6ee
Compare
|
🤖 This change no longer contains upstreamable changes to WPT; closed existing upstream pull request (web-platform-tests/wpt#49748). |
sagudev
added a commit
to sagudev/servo
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 19, 2024
{"fail_fast": false, "matrix": [{"name": "WebGPU CTS", "workflow": "linux", "wpt_layout": "2020", "profile": "production", "unit_tests": false, "bencher": false, "wpt_args": "_webgpu"}]}
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.
#32853 has been adding quite a bit of boilerplate that keeps repeating in each layout logic, in order to correctly resolve sizing keywords.
This patch adds a new
Sizesstruct which holds the preferred, min and max sizing values for one axis, and unifies the logic to resolve the final size into there../mach build -ddoes not report any errors./mach test-tidydoes not report any errors