Bug 1263188 - more assertions, part3, r=yzen

accessible/base/EventTree.cpp

@@ -189,48 +189,52 @@ EventTree::Process()
     node = node->mNext;
   }
 
+  MOZ_ASSERT(mContainer || mDependentEvents.IsEmpty(),
+             "No container, no events");
+  MOZ_ASSERT(!mContainer || !mContainer->IsDefunct(),
+             "Processing events for defunct container");
+
   // Fire mutation events.
-  if (mContainer) {
-    uint32_t eventsCount = mDependentEvents.Length();
-    for (uint32_t jdx = 0; jdx < eventsCount; jdx++) {
-      AccMutationEvent* mtEvent = mDependentEvents[jdx];
-      MOZ_ASSERT(mtEvent->mEventRule != AccEvent::eDoNotEmit,
-                 "The event shouldn't be presented in the tree");
+  uint32_t eventsCount = mDependentEvents.Length();
+  for (uint32_t jdx = 0; jdx < eventsCount; jdx++) {
+    AccMutationEvent* mtEvent = mDependentEvents[jdx];
+    MOZ_ASSERT(mtEvent->mEventRule != AccEvent::eDoNotEmit,
+               "The event shouldn't be presented in the tree");
 
-      nsEventShell::FireEvent(mtEvent);
-      if (mtEvent->mTextChangeEvent) {
-        nsEventShell::FireEvent(mtEvent->mTextChangeEvent);
-      }
-
-      if (mtEvent->IsHide()) {
-        // Fire menupopup end event before a hide event if a menu goes away.
-
-        // XXX: We don't look into children of hidden subtree to find hiding
-        // menupopup (as we did prior bug 570275) because we don't do that when
-        // menu is showing (and that's impossible until bug 606924 is fixed).
-        // Nevertheless we should do this at least because layout coalesces
-        // the changes before our processing and we may miss some menupopup
-        // events. Now we just want to be consistent in content insertion/removal
-        // handling.
-        if (mtEvent->mAccessible->ARIARole() == roles::MENUPOPUP) {
-          nsEventShell::FireEvent(nsIAccessibleEvent::EVENT_MENUPOPUP_END,
-                                  mtEvent->mAccessible);
-        }
-
-        AccHideEvent* hideEvent = downcast_accEvent(mtEvent);
-        if (hideEvent->NeedsShutdown()) {
-          mtEvent->GetDocAccessible()->ShutdownChildrenInSubtree(mtEvent->mAccessible);
-        }
-      }
+    nsEventShell::FireEvent(mtEvent);
+    if (mtEvent->mTextChangeEvent) {
+      nsEventShell::FireEvent(mtEvent->mTextChangeEvent);
     }
 
-    // Fire reorder event at last.
-    if (mFireReorder) {
-      nsEventShell::FireEvent(nsIAccessibleEvent::EVENT_REORDER, mContainer);
-    }
+    if (mtEvent->IsHide()) {
+      // Fire menupopup end event before a hide event if a menu goes away.
 
-    mDependentEvents.Clear();
+      // XXX: We don't look into children of hidden subtree to find hiding
+      // menupopup (as we did prior bug 570275) because we don't do that when
+      // menu is showing (and that's impossible until bug 606924 is fixed).
+      // Nevertheless we should do this at least because layout coalesces
+      // the changes before our processing and we may miss some menupopup
+      // events. Now we just want to be consistent in content insertion/removal
+      // handling.
+      if (mtEvent->mAccessible->ARIARole() == roles::MENUPOPUP) {
+        nsEventShell::FireEvent(nsIAccessibleEvent::EVENT_MENUPOPUP_END,
+                                mtEvent->mAccessible);
+      }
+
+      AccHideEvent* hideEvent = downcast_accEvent(mtEvent);
+      if (hideEvent->NeedsShutdown()) {
+        mtEvent->GetDocAccessible()->ShutdownChildrenInSubtree(mtEvent->mAccessible);
+      }
+    }
   }
+
+  // Fire reorder event at last.
+  if (mFireReorder) {
+    MOZ_ASSERT(mContainer);
+    nsEventShell::FireEvent(nsIAccessibleEvent::EVENT_REORDER, mContainer);
+  }
+
+  mDependentEvents.Clear();
 }
 
 EventTree*