We were instead stretching to the containing block, which implied that
the behaviors of a `stretch` size and `stretch` alignment weren't
consistent.
As resolved by the CSSWG, the behavior will now be:
- If the cross size of the line is known, stretch to the line.
- Otherwise, stretch to the containing block.
See https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11784
This aligns us with Blink, which has already shipped this new behavior.
Testing: Improves existing WPT and adds a new test.
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
Testing: No tests, if `test-wpt` broke again then we would notice pretty
quickly.
Fixes: https://github.com/servo/servo/issues/37124
---------
Signed-off-by: Simon Wülker <simon.wuelker@arcor.de>
The static position rect is calculated assuming that the containing
block would be established by the content box of some ancestor, but the
actual containing block is established by the padding box.
So we need to add the padding of that ancestor.
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
Adds support for min-content, max-content, fit-content and stretch on
the min and max main size properties of a flex item.
I'm removing `automatic_min_size()` and `flex_base_size()` because they
would need to share so much code among themselves and their one caller
that it's simpler to just inline the code.
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
`block_size_is_zero_or_intrinsic()` was always returning true for
`stretch`. This function is used for the margin collapse heuristics
in block layout, so we were considering that an empty element with
`height: stretch` would self-collapse.
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
The CSSWG resolved that `block-size: stretch` on a block-level box
stretches the margin box to fill the parent. However, if the parent
doesn't have padding nor border, and doesn't establish an independent
formatting context, then we assume that the margins will collapse.
Therefore, we treat the margins as zero when resolving the stretch size,
regardless of whether they will actually end up collapsing.
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11044#issuecomment-2599101601https://drafts.csswg.org/css-sizing-4/#stretch-fit-sizing
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
Adds support for min-content, max-content, fit-content and stretch on
the min and max cross size properties of a flex item.
With one exception: when resolving the main sizes, transferred cross
minimums and maximums will still ignore keywords.
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
This changes `FlexItem::content_cross_size` into `Size<Au>` to preserve
keyword sizes. The calculation of the hypothetical cross size still
ignores them though, that will be addressed in a follow-up.
Also, browsers don't follow the spec and treat a stretch size different
than a stretch alignment: the former stretches to the containing block,
while the latter stretches to the line. This aligns Servo with that
behavior (following the spec would require bigger refactorings), so
`stretches()` is renamed to `stretches_to_line()` for clarity.
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
We were always treating an indefinite `stretch` as the automatic size.
This instead treats it as `0px` on min sizing properties, and as `none`
on max sizing properties, aligning with Blink and this recent CSSWG
resolution: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11006
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
* Add tests for sizing keywords on flex items
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
* layout: Partial support for sizing keywords on flex items
When a flex item has `flex-basis: auto`, the used `flex-basis` is the
value of the main size property. In that case, if the main size property
was set to keyword, we were always assuming it was `auto`. Now we handle
non-`auto` keywords correctly.
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
---------
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
layout: Basic implementation of size keywords on `flex-basis`
This splits the logic to resolve the used value of `flex-basis` into its
own method, which preserves size keywords.
And then it changes `flex_base_size()` to resolve the provided keywords
properly. However, it doesn't handle size keywords in the cross axis.
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
Adds support for min-content, max-content, fit-content and stretch,
for block-level elements that don't establish an independent formatting
context, and for block-level elements when there is no float.
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
We were sizing absolutely positioned replaced elements within their
actual containing block instead of the inset-modified containing block.
Then the `stretch` keyword would result in a wrong size.
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
