Kinda tricky because :host only matches rules on the shadow root where the rules
come from. So we need to be careful during invalidation and style sharing.
I didn't use the non_ts_pseudo_class_list bits because as soon as we implement
the :host(..) bits we're going to need to special-case it anyway.
The general schema is the following:
* Rightmost featureless :host selectors are handled inserting them in the
host_rules hashmap. Note that we only insert featureless stuff there. We
could insert all of them and just filter during matching, but that's slightly
annoying.
* The other selectors, like non-featureless :host or what not, are added to the
normal cascade data. This is harmless, since the shadow host rules are never
matched against the host, so we know they'll just never match, and avoids
adding more special-cases.
* Featureless :host selectors to the left of a combinator are handled during
matching, in the special-case of next_element_for_combinator in selectors.
This prevents this from being more invasive, and keeps the usual fast path
slim, but it's a bit hard to match the spec and the implementation.
We could keep a copy of the SelectorIter instead in the matching context to
make the handling of featureless-ness explicit in match_non_ts_pseudo_class,
but we'd still need the special-case anyway, so I'm not fond of it.
* We take advantage of one thing that makes this sound. As you may have
noticed, if you had `root` element which is a ShadowRoot, and you matched
something like `div:host` against it, using a MatchingContext with
current_host == root, we'd incorrectly report a match. But this is impossible
due to the following constraints:
* Shadow root rules aren't matched against the host during styling (except
these featureless selectors).
* DOM APIs' current_host needs to be the _containing_ host, not the element
itself if you're a Shadow host.
Bug: 992245
Reviewed-by: xidorn
MozReview-Commit-ID: KayYNfTXb5h
It's just a struct aggregating stylesheets + CascadeData, with a quirks_mode
parameter because XBL sucks so bad.
Bug: 1436059
Reviewed-by: xidorn
MozReview-Commit-ID: 7q99tSNXo0K
This is a partial revert of
ce1d8cd232
If you're in a shadow tree, you may not be slotted but you still need to look at
the slotted rules, since a <slot> could be a descendant of yours.
Just use the same invalidation map everywhere, and remove complexity.
This means that we can do some extra work while trying to gather invalidation
if there are slotted rules, but I don't think it's a problem.
The test is ported from https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/css/invalidation/slotted.html?l=1&rcl=58d68fdf783d7edde1c82a642e037464861f2787
Curiously, Blink fails the test as written, presumably because they don't flush
styles from getComputedStyle correctly (in their test they do via
updateStyleAndReturnAffectedElementCount), due to <slot>s not being in the flat
tree in their implementation.
Bug: 1429846
Reviewed-by: heycam
MozReview-Commit-ID: 6b7BQ6bGMgd
