There is no need to set the dirty descendants flag unsafely from the layout side
for elements with pending restyles, we can do that on the DOM side when draining
the restyles from the Document.
More layout cleanups from the introduction of a lifetime in LayoutDom<T>
What can I say, the follow-up fixes just kept coming to my door one by one, I couldn't just tell them to go away.
make Document.getElementsByName a live collection
Another new case for NodeList; this and the labels live collection in #25424 are in the pipeline simultaneously, so one of them will need a merge resolution when the other one lands.
Iterating over many same-named elements is potentially slower than it has to be, since getting the nth element from the live view always starts from the start of the tree.
---
<!-- Thank you for contributing to Servo! Please replace each `[ ]` by `[X]` when the step is complete, and replace `___` with appropriate data: -->
- [X] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors
- [X] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors
- [X] These changes fix#25147
<!-- Either: -->
- [X] There are tests for these changes
<!-- Also, please make sure that "Allow edits from maintainers" checkbox is checked, so that we can help you if you get stuck somewhere along the way.-->
<!-- Pull requests that do not address these steps are welcome, but they will require additional verification as part of the review process. -->
Selection DOM interface (but not actual UI selections)
This is work towards #7492.
I put new tests in the mozilla-specific directory rather than the main tree because I'm not sure how upstreamable they are; I'd like opinions on that point.
This adds a new exposed interface, which I understand from tests/mozilla/interfaces.html is something requiring specific approval from someone allowed to give that approval.
Things that aren't done here:
- The spec doesn't describe what selection/script-and-style-elements.html wants, and what it wants seems to require some sort of layout query.
- Actual UI interactions are not present at all; selection.rs has a few TODOs saying which methods I believe the eventual UI code should call for what actions, but there are a lot of fine points here that I don't know about.
- I haven't touched Node; you can ask if a node's in the Selection's Range the same way you'd ask about any other Range, but there's not a faster path just for selection layout.
Add SupportedPropertyNames to Document (also fix iframe getting)
Existing test of named-getting an iframe now succeeds. I added a new test for Object.getOwnPropertyNames(document) based on my understanding of the spec; that test could use a second opinion.
UPDATE: This was trying to do too many things in one PR as originally submitted. It is now using #25572 as a base, and I suggest reviewing that PR before this one to avoid duplicating review effort.
---
<!-- Thank you for contributing to Servo! Please replace each `[ ]` by `[X]` when the step is complete, and replace `___` with appropriate data: -->
- [X] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors
- [X] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors
- [X] These changes fix#7273 for all implemented named getters, fix#25146, and fix the iframe case only of #25145.
<!-- Either: -->
- [X] There are tests for these changes
<!-- Also, please make sure that "Allow edits from maintainers" checkbox is checked, so that we can help you if you get stuck somewhere along the way.-->
<!-- Pull requests that do not address these steps are welcome, but they will require additional verification as part of the review process. -->
Event dispatch rewritten to align to spec, activate on clicks better
I went over the changes to the event dispatch spec that had accumulated over the past few years, rewriting dispatch/invoke/inner-invoke almost completely and modifying other code where it was relevant. Most of the remaining obvious deviations from spec are things that will only come up when we start handling events in shadow DOM.
I am pushing now because I want to see CI test results, but please do not approve this PR just if automated test improvements look good. I may have broken some actual UI interactions in the course of fixing synthetic events, and some manual testing is needed, including checking that manual interactions with interactive content continue to fire the events they're supposed to.
---
<!-- Thank you for contributing to Servo! Please replace each `[ ]` by `[X]` when the step is complete, and replace `___` with appropriate data: -->
- [X] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors
- [X] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors
- [X] These changes fix#25384 and fix#22783 and fix#25199
<!-- Either: -->
- [ ] There are automated tests for the synthetic-click parts of these changes, BUT the effects on real UI events need some manual testing before merging
<!-- Also, please make sure that "Allow edits from maintainers" checkbox is checked, so that we can help you if you get stuck somewhere along the way.-->
<!-- Pull requests that do not address these steps are welcome, but they will require additional verification as part of the review process. -->
Attr is a Node, with consequences for many Node methods
<!-- Please describe your changes on the following line: -->
Attr is now a Node, as current WHATWG specs require. I think I did some unidiomatic things to make compareDocumentPosition work and it could use a look by someone more familiar with how to write concise Rust code. I also think the new cases in compareDocumentPosition lack tests; it is possible to compare the position of two attributes, or of an attribute and an element, and I don't think any tests are exercising that functionality.
---
<!-- Thank you for contributing to Servo! Please replace each `[ ]` by `[X]` when the step is complete, and replace `___` with appropriate data: -->
- [X] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors
- [X] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors
- [X] These changes fix#25124
<!-- Either: -->
- [ ] There are tests for these changes (existing cases of Node methods are well-tested, and there is a WPT test specifically for whether Attr is Node, but I'm not sure about new Node method cases)
<!-- Also, please make sure that "Allow edits from maintainers" checkbox is checked, so that we can help you if you get stuck somewhere along the way.-->
<!-- Pull requests that do not address these steps are welcome, but they will require additional verification as part of the review process. -->
Restructure Blob, structured serialization
<!-- Please describe your changes on the following line: -->
FIX#24052 and also address the "cloning" half of FIX#23917
---
<!-- Thank you for contributing to Servo! Please replace each `[ ]` by `[X]` when the step is complete, and replace `___` with appropriate data: -->
- [ ] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors
- [ ] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors
- [ ] These changes fix #___ (GitHub issue number if applicable)
<!-- Either: -->
- [ ] There are tests for these changes OR
- [ ] These changes do not require tests because ___
<!-- Also, please make sure that "Allow edits from maintainers" checkbox is checked, so that we can help you if you get stuck somewhere along the way.-->
<!-- Pull requests that do not address these steps are welcome, but they will require additional verification as part of the review process. -->
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
---
This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="34" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/24123)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
Fix keypress trigger condition
Fix#22346
keypress event should be triggered for keys representing character
values. So, we should trigger this event for enter key.
This event should not trigger for IME inputs.
TODO:
- It seems we don't handle composition events correctly. To implement this keypress condition correctly, we should fix that first. In my current implementation, onkeypress event will be trigger when the user press Enter key to send inputs in IME (onCompotionEnd).
- I don't update any tests, and I couldn't find any tests related to this change in WPT. It might be better to add some tests for it, but I don't know what is the appropriate way.
<!-- Please describe your changes on the following line: -->
---
<!-- Thank you for contributing to Servo! Please replace each `[ ]` by `[X]` when the step is complete, and replace `___` with appropriate data: -->
- [x] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors
- [x] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors
- [x] These changes fix #___ (GitHub issue number if applicable)
<!-- Either: -->
- [ ] There are tests for these changes OR
- [ ] These changes do not require tests because ___
<!-- Also, please make sure that "Allow edits from maintainers" checkbox is checked, so that we can help you if you get stuck somewhere along the way.-->
<!-- Pull requests that do not address these steps are welcome, but they will require additional verification as part of the review process. -->
keypress event should be triggered for keys representing character
values. So, we should trigger this event for enter key.
This event should not trigger for IME inputs.
Refactor submission
This is my first contribution, so please correct me if I'm wrong
I refactored the code as described #22782.
---
<!-- Thank you for contributing to Servo! Please replace each `[ ]` by `[X]` when the step is complete, and replace `___` with appropriate data: -->
- [x] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors
- [x] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors
- [ ] These changes fix#22782 (GitHub issue number if applicable)
<!-- Either: -->
- [ ] There are tests for these changes OR
- [ ] These changes do not require tests because ___
<!-- Also, please make sure that "Allow edits from maintainers" checkbox is checked, so that we can help you if you get stuck somewhere along the way.-->
<!-- Pull requests that do not address these steps are welcome, but they will require additional verification as part of the review process. -->
This needs a lot more hooks before it'll actually be a good
implementation, but for a start it can help get some feedback on if this
is the right way to go about it.
Part of servo/servo#4577
Step four of the dom document body calls for throwing an exception
if no document element was found. The current setBody implementation
was looking for a document element that is also an html element. It
has been updated to use GetDocumentElement which returns any document
element.
