When specifying either `background-position-x: right` or
`background-position-y: bottom` without an offset value no
EdgeStyleValue was created.
However, the spec says the offset should be optional.
Now, if you do not provide an offset, it creates the EdgeStyleValue
with a default offset of 0 pixels.
I couldn't find a way to hit this function with our current testing
infrastructure, but since it breaks many websites, let's just get a
fix in immediately.
Regressed in 6fecd8cc44.
We do this by piggybacking on FormattingContext helpers instead of
reinventing the wheel in FlexFormattingContext.
This fixes an issue where `min-width: fit-content` (and other
layout-dependent values) were treated as 0 on flex items.
This makes the cookie banners look okay on https://microsoft.com/ :^)
If an inline-block has a percentage height that relies on the auto
height of the containing block, it should always resolve to the
automatic height of the box, regardless of the percentage value. This
change may seem confusing, but it aligns with the behavior of other
engines.
There are two parts to this fix:
- First, StyleProperties::transformations() would previously omit calc()
values entirely when returning the list of transformations. This was
very confusing to StackingContext which then tried to index into the
list based on faulty assumptions. Fix this by emitting calc values.
- Second, StackingContext::get_transformation_matrix() now always calls
resolve() on length-percentages. This takes care of actually resolving
calc() values. If no reference value for percentages is provided, we
default to 0px.
This stops LibWeb from asserting on websites with calc() in transform
values, such as https://qt.io/ :^)
We're gonna call parse_a_comma_separated_list_of_component_values from
another cpp file soon, so let's prepare for that by instantiating the
specific version we need.
This does not implement extra functionality on top of the basic parser,
but allows multiple places in LibWeb to call the 'correct' interface for
when it is fully implemented.
Since we deliberately skip positioned elements in paint_descendants(),
we have to make sure we actually paint them in the subsequent
paint_internal() pass.
Before this change, we were only painting positioned elements whose
paintable was a PaintableBox, neglecting inline-level relpos elements.
