I don't know how idiomatic this is for rust, but the only way I could think of to do this is with a union enum and generics. As the number of decoders should never be more than a few, this shouldn't really be a problem.
The HttpRequest trait doesn't make sense, on further reflection. Rather,
just modify the method signature on the requester. The hyper request was
only being used to mutate it's headers anyway.
servo/servo#6727
Because we're using unsized types not for requesting, there's not a
satisfactory way of doing this without boxing the request...
Once unsized stuff lands in rust 1.2/1.3(???) then this should be
implemented with Rc's instead of Box's.
For the time being I'm not sure what else to do.
servo/servo#6727
Refactor tests/ref/iframe/size_attributes_vertical_writing_mode.html
… to not use an arbitrary 104px offset that just happens to match the reference and relies on incorrect behavior.
See discussion in #7313.
r? @pcwalton
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.png" height=40 alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/7355)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
This commit implements WebGL's:
* cullFace
* frontFace
* enable
* disable
* depthMask
* colorMask
* clearDepth
* clearStencil
* depthFunc
* depthRange
* hint
* lineWidth
* pixelStorei
* polygonOffset
* texParameteri
* texParameterf
* texImage2D (partially)
It inlines a lot of OpenGL calls to keep the file
`components/canvas/webgl_paint_task.rs` as small as possible while
keeping readability.
It also improves error detection on previous calls, and sets node damage
on the canvas in the drawing calls.
It adds a `TexImage2D` reftest, even though it's not enabled because:
* WebGL paints the image when it loads (asynchronously), so the reftest doesn't wait for it and it finishes early
* If we change the source for the base64 src of the image it works as expected in non-headless mode, but the test harness locks
Fix#7268 - getComputedStyle should take `Element`, not `HTMLElement`
This is my first patch, I hope I'm doing it right.
About the test, do you think this is enough and reliable?
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.png" height=40 alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/7288)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
layout: Centralize the logic that determines whether fragments get layers in the fragment.
…so that it can be activated when we're forcing
the creation of extra layers due to positioned descendants that
themselves have layers.
The newly failing tests were tests that accidentally passed due to
incorrect stacking order.
Closes#7281.
r? @mbrubeck
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.png" height=40 alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/7291)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
