401 authorization UI then restart request/save successful auth creds
Step 7 of the NCSU student project Implement HTTP authorization UI
> make an authorization UI appear when a 401 HTTP response is received (StatusCode::Unauthorized) - in load in http_loader.rs, right before trying to process an HTTP redirection, use the new tinyfiledialogs library to make two prompts appear (username and password), then restart the request with the new authorization value present applied. If an authorization value was present and the response is successful, add the credentials to the authorization cache.
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
---
This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="35" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/10328)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
Extracted Mako-based code generation invokation to separate .py files.
This breaks out some of the parts on #10586, that should be easily mergeable (hopefully pretty much a no-brainer really). The idea would be to let you review & merge it first, and then I'll complete the other PR rebase off of this stuff.
@bholley - I did like you suggested and broke it out for `geckolib` as well. The tests should also be running without problems (tested `./mach test-unit` locally).
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
---
This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="35" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/10617)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
This breaks out some of the parts on #10586, that should be easily mergeable. The idea would be to let you review & merge it first, and then I'll complete the other PR rebase off of this stuff.
Take the stdout lock when printing profile data
Acquiring the stdout lock while printing the profile data prevents other
messages printed to stdout from being interleaved with prints from elsewhere.
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
---
This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="35" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/10589)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
Added panic message to failures.
Added the panic message to failures. This is a step towards #10334, since it gives us access to the panic error message when we fire a `mozbrowsererror` event. The remaining steps are also to record the backtrace, and to report the failure in the event.
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
---
This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="35" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/10587)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
In rust-url 1.0 the `Url` struct is going to have private fields, and there
is no way to to create an aribitrary one without going through the parser.
The plugin never had a clear demonstrated performance benefit,
it was made mostly because it was possible and relatively easy at the time.
Implement HTMLBaseElement attributes
The remaining test failure in `base_multiple.html` looks like there's a problem with the test itself (it does not have a `<base>` tag at all).
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
---
This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="35" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/10512)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
Add some Gecko-supported CSS keyword properties
I have added all properties that are marked with (exactly) PARSE_VALUES and H | K in [0] to properties.mako.rs, as part of #10408. A few questions and remarks:
* I created a SVG style struct. Should those properties be somewhere else instead?
* I did not know what to do with ime-mode (which lives in nsStyleUIReset), so I did not include it.
* Servo already has a -servo-overflow-clip-box property, while Gecko has overflow-clip-box. Should those be consolidated?
* There is a code comment (marked with XXX) about scroll-snap-type-y. Should I add a <%self:longhand> template tag for that, similar to the one in overflow-y?
I am getting error E0053 while trying to run "./mach build-geckolib -r" on master, and the bholley/stylo branch doesn't support the products keyword argument yet, so I haven't exactly checked this compiles properly. It doesn't add any new compilation errors before the E0053 one, though.
Let me know if some extra information (say, a table saying where each property went) would be useful in the review process. r? @bholley
[0] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pSw2SjNxXZAQ19SAuNKcs5u4S7Zkc1ebEOkSP4oITUQ/edit?pref=2&pli=1
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
---
This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="35" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/10524)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
