This patch implements the full "old model" height algorithm from the
CSS Positioned Layout spec. I went with the old model since we don't
yet have the machinery required to implement the new model.
Also, the width calculations already follow the old model, so this
is symmetric with that. Eventually we should of course implement the new
positioned layout model.
Now that intrinsic heights (correctly) depend on the amount of available
width, we can't just cache the first calculated min-content and
max-content heights and reuse it without thinking.
Instead, we have to cache three pairs:
- min-content & max-content height with definite available width
- min-content & max-content height with min-content available width
- min-content & max-content height with max-content available width
There might be some more elegant way of solving this, but basically this
makes the cache work correctly when someone's containing block is being
sized under a width constraint.
We were incorrectly resolving them against the available width, which
may or may not be the same as the containing block width.
The specification for these properties says that percentages resolve
against the containing block width, so that's what we should do.
When calculating the fit-content width or height for a flex item, we
need to use the available space *outside* the item, not the available
space *inside*.
We now know exactly how to calculate the min-content cross size for
multi-line flex containers, which is great. The other three intrinsic
constraints still fall back to the old ad-hoc code path.
5630e7b064
The main benefit of this is respecting the iframe frameborder
attribute, as frameborder="0" is a pretty common way of removing
the default <iframe> border.
For example, it's on all YouTube embeds by default and on some
ReCAPTCHA embeds.
This fixes some off-by-one wrapping issues that became visible when
running on x86_64. The problem still existed on i686, but by chance
did not show up due to a -/+ 0.000001 difference between the two.
In particular, StringView::contains(char) is often used with a u32
code point. When this is done, the compiler will for some reason allow
data corruption to occur silently.
In fact, this is one of two reasons for the following OSS Fuzz issue:
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=49184
This is probably a very old bug.
In the particular case of URLParser, AK::is_url_code_point got confused:
return /* ... */ || "!$&'()*+,-./:;=?@_~"sv.contains(code_point);
If code_point is a large code point that happens to have the correct
lower bytes, AK::is_url_code_point is then convinced that the given
code point is okay, even if it is actually problematic.
This commit fixes *only* the silent data corruption due to the erroneous
conversion, and does not fully resolve OSS-Fuzz#49184.
Add ability to use values passed to grid-template-columns and
grid-template-rows for CSS Grid layout within a repeat() function.
E.g. grid-template-columns: repeat(2, 50px); means to have two columns
of 50px width each.
Hopefully no one else will forget to call set_prototype with the cached
prototype they just retrieved from a realm and spend a long time
wondering why their object has no properties...
Get rid of the bespoke NavigatorObject class and use the modern IDL
strategies for creating platform objects to re-implement Navigator and
its associcated mixin interfaces. While we're here, implement it in a
way that brings WorkerNavigator up to spec :^)
We can now properly add the prototypes and constructors to the global
object of the Worker's inner realm, so we don't need this window for
anything anymore.
The intent is to use these to autogenerate prototype declarations for
Window and WorkerGlobalScope classes.
And the spec links are just nice to have :^)
When the indicated column-span is greater than the implicit grid (like
in cases when the grid has the default size of 1x1, and the column is
supposed to span any number greater than that), then previously were
crashing.
Fixes a bug in the maybe_add_column() implementation of the
OccupationGrid. Previously were checking for the width of the grid based
off of the first row, and so when augmenting the column count row-by-row
the latter rows would have differing column counts.
Also, were doing an unnecessary + 1 which I imagine comes from before
when I wasn't quite clear on whether I was referring to columns by
index or by the css-value of the column (column 1 in the css is
column index 0).
This implementation includes a first cut at run the unfocusing steps
from the spec, with many things left unimplemented.
The viewport related spec steps in particular don't seem to map to
LibWeb concepts, which makes figuring out if things are properly focused
much more difficult.
For percentage cross min/max sizes that resolve against indefinite
available space, we now essentially ignore them instead of resolving
them to 0 at the start of layout.
Yet another legacy "is inline-block?" condition was causing us to insert
inline nodes directly as children of inline-flex containers (instead of
wrapping them in anonymous blocks, which would then cause them to become
flex items.)
We're supposed to hit test positive z-index stacking contexts first,
and negative z-index stacking contexts later. Instead, we were hit
testing all stacking contexts both times.
This made hit testing unbearably slow on some websites.
While we're here, also add an extra comment about why stacking contexts
are traversed in reverse order. It tripped me up while looking at this,
so I'm sure it could trip someone else up too.
Regressed in 44057c9482.
Ensure that when a grid item is passed with a span and a fixed end
position, that if the resulting start of this item is less than 0 then
it won't throw. This is a temporary measure until the correct
functionality is implemented.
