Pass cross-axis known_dimension when computing flex item min size #545
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
(fixes sizing of children that have inherent aspect ratio (e.g. images))
TimJentzsch
approved these changes
Oct 2, 2023
| @@ -628,6 +628,7 @@ fn determine_flex_base_size( | |||
|
|
|||
| // Parent size for child sizing | |||
| let cross_axis_parent_size = constants.node_inner_size.cross(dir); | |||
| let child_parent_size = Size::NONE.with_cross(dir, cross_axis_parent_size); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not really related to this PR, but perhaps we can introduce something like Size::cross in a later PR instead of using this pattern :)
alice-i-cecile
approved these changes
Oct 2, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Objective
Fixes bevyengine/bevy#9841
Pass cross-axis known_dimension when computing flex item min size
(fixes sizing of children that have inherent aspect ratio (e.g. images))
Context
I would like to add a gentest for this case. However, it requires extending the gentest harness to handle images, and I would like to avoid conflicts with #490 which also modifies that harness (and I suspect would be a pain to rebase on top of other changes). So I propose to create an issue (#546) for the test, merge just the fix, and then add the test once #490 lands.
I also intend to backport this to 0.3.x seeing as it's so small and it has been reported by a Bevy user. So I've stuck the changelog entry under 0.3.14.
Feedback wanted
Does this seem like a reasonable approach?
P.S. The only really meaningful change in this diff is the very bottom line. The rest is just moving code higher up the function to avoid recomputing a value. And removing a redundant
.clamp()that was being called on an already-clamped value.