Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 50 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign uplayout_2020: Paint hoisted positioned fragments in tree order #25945
Conversation
Instead of painting hoisted position fragments in the order to which they are hoisted, paint them in tree order and properly incorporate them into the stacking context. We do this by creating a placeholder fragment in the original tree position of hoisted fragments. The ghost fragment contains an atomic id which links back to the hoisted fragment in the containing block. While building the stacking context, we keep track of containing blocks and their children. When encountering a placeholder fragment we look at the containing block's hoisted children in order to properly paint the hoisted fragment. One notable design modification in this change is that hoisted fragments no longer need an AnonymousFragment as their parent. Instead they are now direct children of the fragment that establishes their containing block.
|
Any way you could avoid IDs and use an |
|
My original idea was to use a thread-safe reference-counted type, but I believe that @SimonSapin suggested the id approach. |
|
Ah, just to clarify the main issue is that we could need to create a data structure in the Rayon task for the tree-order-parent and modify it in the containing-block-parent. |
|
I don't understand what that means. Can't the two separate boxes point to the same content behind an |
|
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you are suggesting. I could create a |
|
r? @nox |
|
@bors-servo r+ |
|
|
bors-servo
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 13, 2020
layout_2020: Paint hoisted positioned fragments in tree order Instead of painting hoisted position fragments in the order to which they are hoisted, paint them in tree order and properly incorporate them into the stacking context. We do this by creating a placeholder fragment in the original tree position of hoisted fragments. The ghost fragment contains an atomic id which links back to the hoisted fragment in the containing block. While building the stacking context, we keep track of containing blocks and their children. When encountering a placeholder fragment we look at the containing block's hoisted children in order to properly paint the hoisted fragment. One notable design modification in this change is that hoisted fragments no longer need an AnonymousFragment as their parent. Instead they are now direct children of the fragment that establishes their containing block. <!-- Please describe your changes on the following line: --> --- <!-- Thank you for contributing to Servo! Please replace each `[ ]` by `[X]` when the step is complete, and replace `___` with appropriate data: --> - [x] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors - [x] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors - [ ] These changes fix #___ (GitHub issue number if applicable) <!-- Either: --> - [x] There are tests for these changes OR - [ ] These changes do not require tests because ___ <!-- Also, please make sure that "Allow edits from maintainers" checkbox is checked, so that we can help you if you get stuck somewhere along the way.--> <!-- Pull requests that do not address these steps are welcome, but they will require additional verification as part of the review process. -->
|
|
|
@bors-servo retry |
bors-servo
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 13, 2020
layout_2020: Paint hoisted positioned fragments in tree order Instead of painting hoisted position fragments in the order to which they are hoisted, paint them in tree order and properly incorporate them into the stacking context. We do this by creating a placeholder fragment in the original tree position of hoisted fragments. The ghost fragment contains an atomic id which links back to the hoisted fragment in the containing block. While building the stacking context, we keep track of containing blocks and their children. When encountering a placeholder fragment we look at the containing block's hoisted children in order to properly paint the hoisted fragment. One notable design modification in this change is that hoisted fragments no longer need an AnonymousFragment as their parent. Instead they are now direct children of the fragment that establishes their containing block. <!-- Please describe your changes on the following line: --> --- <!-- Thank you for contributing to Servo! Please replace each `[ ]` by `[X]` when the step is complete, and replace `___` with appropriate data: --> - [x] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors - [x] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors - [ ] These changes fix #___ (GitHub issue number if applicable) <!-- Either: --> - [x] There are tests for these changes OR - [ ] These changes do not require tests because ___ <!-- Also, please make sure that "Allow edits from maintainers" checkbox is checked, so that we can help you if you get stuck somewhere along the way.--> <!-- Pull requests that do not address these steps are welcome, but they will require additional verification as part of the review process. -->
|
@bors-servo retry |
bors-servo
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 13, 2020
layout_2020: Paint hoisted positioned fragments in tree order Instead of painting hoisted position fragments in the order to which they are hoisted, paint them in tree order and properly incorporate them into the stacking context. We do this by creating a placeholder fragment in the original tree position of hoisted fragments. The ghost fragment contains an atomic id which links back to the hoisted fragment in the containing block. While building the stacking context, we keep track of containing blocks and their children. When encountering a placeholder fragment we look at the containing block's hoisted children in order to properly paint the hoisted fragment. One notable design modification in this change is that hoisted fragments no longer need an AnonymousFragment as their parent. Instead they are now direct children of the fragment that establishes their containing block. <!-- Please describe your changes on the following line: --> --- <!-- Thank you for contributing to Servo! Please replace each `[ ]` by `[X]` when the step is complete, and replace `___` with appropriate data: --> - [x] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors - [x] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors - [ ] These changes fix #___ (GitHub issue number if applicable) <!-- Either: --> - [x] There are tests for these changes OR - [ ] These changes do not require tests because ___ <!-- Also, please make sure that "Allow edits from maintainers" checkbox is checked, so that we can help you if you get stuck somewhere along the way.--> <!-- Pull requests that do not address these steps are welcome, but they will require additional verification as part of the review process. -->
|
|
|
@bors-servo retry |
bors-servo
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 13, 2020
layout_2020: Paint hoisted positioned fragments in tree order Instead of painting hoisted position fragments in the order to which they are hoisted, paint them in tree order and properly incorporate them into the stacking context. We do this by creating a placeholder fragment in the original tree position of hoisted fragments. The ghost fragment contains an atomic id which links back to the hoisted fragment in the containing block. While building the stacking context, we keep track of containing blocks and their children. When encountering a placeholder fragment we look at the containing block's hoisted children in order to properly paint the hoisted fragment. One notable design modification in this change is that hoisted fragments no longer need an AnonymousFragment as their parent. Instead they are now direct children of the fragment that establishes their containing block. <!-- Please describe your changes on the following line: --> --- <!-- Thank you for contributing to Servo! Please replace each `[ ]` by `[X]` when the step is complete, and replace `___` with appropriate data: --> - [x] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors - [x] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors - [ ] These changes fix #___ (GitHub issue number if applicable) <!-- Either: --> - [x] There are tests for these changes OR - [ ] These changes do not require tests because ___ <!-- Also, please make sure that "Allow edits from maintainers" checkbox is checked, so that we can help you if you get stuck somewhere along the way.--> <!-- Pull requests that do not address these steps are welcome, but they will require additional verification as part of the review process. -->
|
@bors-servo retry |
bors-servo
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 13, 2020
layout_2020: Paint hoisted positioned fragments in tree order Instead of painting hoisted position fragments in the order to which they are hoisted, paint them in tree order and properly incorporate them into the stacking context. We do this by creating a placeholder fragment in the original tree position of hoisted fragments. The ghost fragment contains an atomic id which links back to the hoisted fragment in the containing block. While building the stacking context, we keep track of containing blocks and their children. When encountering a placeholder fragment we look at the containing block's hoisted children in order to properly paint the hoisted fragment. One notable design modification in this change is that hoisted fragments no longer need an AnonymousFragment as their parent. Instead they are now direct children of the fragment that establishes their containing block. <!-- Please describe your changes on the following line: --> --- <!-- Thank you for contributing to Servo! Please replace each `[ ]` by `[X]` when the step is complete, and replace `___` with appropriate data: --> - [x] `./mach build -d` does not report any errors - [x] `./mach test-tidy` does not report any errors - [ ] These changes fix #___ (GitHub issue number if applicable) <!-- Either: --> - [x] There are tests for these changes OR - [ ] These changes do not require tests because ___ <!-- Also, please make sure that "Allow edits from maintainers" checkbox is checked, so that we can help you if you get stuck somewhere along the way.--> <!-- Pull requests that do not address these steps are welcome, but they will require additional verification as part of the review process. -->
|
|
|
@bors-servo retry |
|
|
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.
mrobinson commentedMar 11, 2020
Instead of painting hoisted position fragments in the order to which
they are hoisted, paint them in tree order and properly incorporate them
into the stacking context.
We do this by creating a placeholder fragment in the original tree position
of hoisted fragments. The ghost fragment contains an atomic id which
links back to the hoisted fragment in the containing block.
While building the stacking context, we keep track of containing blocks
and their children. When encountering a placeholder fragment we look at
the containing block's hoisted children in order to properly paint the
hoisted fragment.
One notable design modification in this change is that hoisted fragments
no longer need an AnonymousFragment as their parent. Instead they are
now direct children of the fragment that establishes their containing block.
./mach build -ddoes not report any errors./mach test-tidydoes not report any errors