This patch breaks FormattingContext::layout_inside() into two functions,
one that creates an independent formatting context (if needed), and
another that calls the former and then performs the inside layout within
the appropriate context.
The main goal here was to make layout_inside() return the independent
formatting context if one was created. This will allow us to defer
certain operations in child contexts until the parent context has
finished formatting the child root box.
Per spec, the initial containing block (ICB) should have the size of the
viewport. We have only done this for the width until now, since we had
no way to express scrollable overflow.
This patch adds Layout::Box::m_overflow_data, an optional struct that
can hold on to information about a box's overflow. Then we have BFC
set the ICB up with some scrollable overflow instead of sizing it to fit
its content vertically.
This fixes a number of broken layouts where correctness depends on
having the appropriate ICB height.
Apparently it's not only replaced elements that can have intrinsic
sizes, so let's move this concept from ReplacedBox to Box. To avoid
bloating Box, we make the accessors virtual.
Since FFC is only ever run() on the flex container, we can assume (but
verify) that the run box is the flex container and use an accessor
throughout. The end result: less parameter passing.
Determining the available main and cross space is now done by a separate
function. The signature is a little bit hairy since this function
computes some things that are used by subsequent algorithm steps.
Factoring can definitely be improved further.
Per css-sizing-3:
Additionally, the size of the containing block of an absolutely
positioned element is always definite with respect to that element.
As I understand this, it doesn't mean that all absolutely positioned
boxes have definite size, but that the containing block of an absolutely
positioned descendant has definite size from the perspective of the
descendant.
When computing whether whitespace should be collapsed or not, we have to
consider empty fragments, since <br> will produce an empty fragment to
force a line break.
LineBox::is_empty_or_ends_in_whitespace() is amended to look at the
length of the last fragment, and return true if it is 0.
Per the spec, only a BlockContainer" can have line boxes, so let's not
clutter up every Layout::Box with line boxes.
This also allows us to establish an invariant that BFC and IFC always
operate on a Layout::BlockContainer.
Note that if BlockContainer has all block-level children, its line boxes
are not used for anything. They are only used in the all inline-level
children scenario.
List item markers will never have children, so let's mark them as such,
which now allows our layout system to skip over their "insides" and
going straight to positioning instead.
Some boxes cannot have children (most commonly replaced elements),
and so there is nothing meaningful inside them to layout.
We now use the can_have_children() flag to quickly skip over such boxes
instead of creating a formatting context and other pointless busywork.
There's a subtle difference here. A "block box" in the spec is a
block-level box, while a "block container" is a box whose children are
either all inline-level boxes in an IFC, or all block-level boxes
participating in a BFC.
Notably, an "inline-block" box is a "block container" but not a "block
box" since it is itself inline-level.
The CSS spec uses the name "block formatting context root" when talking
about a box that establishes a BFC. So let's call it BFC::root() in our
code as well, instead of the less specific BFC::context_box().
Until now, we've internally thought of the CSS "display" property as a
single-value property. In practice, "display" is a much more complex
property that comes in a number of configurations.
The most interesting one is the two-part format that describes the
outside and inside behavior of a box. Switching our own internal
representation towards this model will allow for much cleaner
abstractions around layout and the various formatting contexts.
Note that we don't *parse* two-part "display" yet, this is only about
changing the internal representation of the property.
Spec: https://drafts.csswg.org/css-display
