If I had to write that again I would've killed myself :).
This is still not perfect, and the system font code is still quite a mess, but
well, little steps.
Bug: 1455358
Reviewed-by: xidorn
MozReview-Commit-ID: BmrZlCSejo7
These won't "just work", pending changes from bug 1436048 to use a floating
point representation for those.
Bug: 1454883
Reviewed-by: xidorn
MozReview-Commit-ID: Bi5iTdFreMA
No cleaner ideas right now that carrying that counter around... Maybe a custom
type may be cleaner?
This makes ApplicableDeclarationBlock a bit bigger. I could probably try to make
the counter a 4 / 5-bit number or something and pack the counter there in the
SourceOrderAndCascadeLevel somehow...
But doesn't seem really worth the churn, and can be done as a followup in any
case. Let me know if you want to block on that.
Bug: 1454162
Reviewed-by: heycam
MozReview-Commit-ID: 1LdW9S4xA6f
Note that we also drop the dead optional aReusableSheets argument from
the async parsing path, since it was always null.
Bug: 1346988
Reviewed-by: bz,emilio
MozReview-Commit-ID: KddpGFdaqEe
Update to smallbitvec 2.1
---
- [x] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors
- [x] `./mach build-geckolib` does not report any errors
- [x] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors
- [x] These changes do not require tests because covered by existing tests
<!-- 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/20662)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
This also adopts the resolution of [1] while at it, and switches XUL to not
support display: contents until a use case appears.
This makes our behavior consistent both with the spec and also in terms of
handling dynamic changes to stuff that would otherwise get suppressed.
Also makes us consistent with both Blink and WebKit in terms of computed style.
We were the only ones respecting "behaves as display: none" without actually
computing to display: none. Will file a spec issue to get that changed.
It also makes us match Blink and WebKit in terms of respecting display: contents
before other suppressions, see the reftest which I didn't write as a WPT
(because there's no spec supporting neither that or the opposite of what we do),
where a <g> element respects display: contents even though if it had any other
kind of display value we'd suppress the frame for it and all the descendants
since it's an SVG element in a non-SVG subtree.
Also, this removes the page-break bit from the display: contents loop, which I
think is harmless.
As long as the tests under style are based in namespace id / node name /
traversal parent, this should not make style sharing go wrong in any way, since
that's the first style sharing check we do at [2].
The general idea under this change is making all nodes with computed style of
display: contents actually honor it. Otherwise there's no way of making the
setup sound except re-introducing something similar to all the state tracking
removed in bug 1303605.
[1]: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2167
[2]: https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/fca4426325624fecbd493c31389721513fc49fef/servo/components/style/sharing/mod.rs#700
Bug: 1453702
Reviewed-by: mats, xidorn
MozReview-Commit-ID: JoCKnGYEleD
This is necessary because we can't create GeckoStyleSheets off-main-thread,
so we need a placeholder until it can be filled in.
Bug: 1454030
Reviewed-by: emilio
MozReview-Commit-ID: ssRme4fLYg
Don't make logical properties animatable
|animation_type| was renamed in 94fb839fdd, but the commit missed renaming
one place. It means that some of logical properties might have been
accidentally animatable. Logical properties should be animatable but we
haven't yet implemented the proper Animate trait for logical properties.
<!-- 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/20602)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
We could invalidate in a slightly more fine-grained way, but I don't think it's
worth the churn vs. keeping the special-cases minimal.
Bug: 1452640
Reviewed-by: xidorn
MozReview-Commit-ID: 5DkQrgwg9GW
|animation_type| was renamed in 94fb839fdd, but the commit missed renaming
one place. It means that some of logical properties might have been
accidentally animatable. Logical properties should be animatable but we
haven't yet implemented the proper Animate trait for logical properties.
