Fix requestAnimationFrame timestamps in queue
This resolves#7044 which involved callbacks in a queue not receiving the same timestamp despite the specification saying they should. An extra test was added to verify the correct behavior.
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.png" height=40 alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/7073)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
This resolves#7044 which involved callbacks
in a queue not receiving the same timestamp despite
the specification saying they should. An extra test
was added to verify the correct behavior.
Make the Ahem font available to test-css and test-wpt tests.
Add support for user stylesheets, and provide one to tests with an `@font-face` rule for it.
Fix#6195.
Many previously-failing tests now pass, and a few previously-passing now fail.
Among the latter, `font-family-013.htm` and `fonts-013.htm` are testing that the Ahem font is not used for characters it doesn’t have a glyph for. They were passing because Ahem was not available at all, and now fail because we don’t implement font fallback correctly.
The others also use Ahem, but I don’t understand yet what’s going on exactly.
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.png" height=40 alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/7013)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
Provide a user stylesheet with an `@font-face` rule for it.
Fix#6195.
Many previously-failing tests now pass, and a few previously-passing now fail.
Among the latter, `font-family-013.htm` and `fonts-013.htm` are testing
that the Ahem font is not used for characters it doesn’t have a glyph for.
They were passing because Ahem was not available at all,
and now fail because we don’t implement font fallback correctly.
The others also use Ahem, but I don’t understand yet what’s going on exactly.
This excludes:
* cssparser, as it contains changes that cause test failures;
* tenacious, as it has not yet been updated to the current rustc
(Manishearth/rust-tenacious#6);
* ipc-channel, as it doesn't build on linux upstream.
layout: Make sure anonymous table flows are statically positioned.
The failing `float-applies-to-*` CSS 2.1 tests never really should have
been passing in the first place; they depend on floats inside
fixed-layout tables working properly, which they don't.
Closes#6078.
Closes#6709.
Closes#6858.
r? @mbrubeck
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.png" height=40 alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/6977)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
The failing `float-applies-to-*` CSS 2.1 tests never really should have
been passing in the first place; they depend on floats inside
fixed-layout tables working properly, which they don't.
Closes#6078.
Closes#6709.
Closes#6858.
layout: Take inline margins into account when determining the intrinsic sizes of fragments.
Avoids a needless wrapped line in the repository name on GitHub.
r? @mbrubeck
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.png" height=40 alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/7011)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
Use Box<str> instead of Box<String> for UnscannedTextFragmentInfo
This removes an extraneous layer of indirection, without increasing the size of the `SpecificFragmentInfo` enum (because `Box<str>` is a fat pointer, which is the same size as the `FlowRef` trait object that is already stored in `InlineAbsoluteHypotheticalFragmentInfo`)
r? @pcwalton
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.png" height=40 alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/7014)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
Fixes#6879 (Improper connections to the devtools server)
Modifies how we behave in the case that something attempts to communicate with the devtools server improperly. This includes...
- Invalid encoding (Non `UTF8`) of the packet length / error parsing / none specified
- JSON encoding error (such as a `Parser::SyntaxError` or a `Parser::IoError`)
Happy to make changes if anyone has an issue with this or feels another way is more idiomatic!
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.png" height=40 alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/7010)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
