This is a big step in order to merge both.
Also allows to remove some very silly casts, though it causes us to add some
ToSupports around to deal with ambiguity of casts from nsIDocument to
nsISupports, and add a dummy nsISupports implementation that will go away later
in the series.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D15352
Just use nsTArray. They're used to keep an array of strong references to
documents, and never use nsISupports-specific methods.
Plus they're are allocated on the stack so it should be safe to access them via
ranged for, so do that.
This is needed because nsCOMArray<T> depends on the cast from T to nsISupports
not to be ambiguous. I could fix that if needed, but it seems easier to just not
use it in these two cases.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D15351
This is to prevent Part 1 from breaking
testing/web-platform/tests/css/css-multicol/multicol-span-all-restyle-002.html
After introducing Part 1, we now use CreateContinuingFrame() to create
non-column-span wrapper frames, which use nsFrame::Init() rather than
InitAndRestoreFrame() to initialize them. Because the bits in
aState.mAdditionalStateBits are added to frames only when
nsCSSFrameConstructor::InitAndRestoreFrame() is called. We need a new
way to add the NS_FRAME_PART_OF_IBSPLIT to non-column-span wrapper
frames.
Note that we used to add NS_FRAME_PART_OF_IBSPLIT to both column-span
wrapper and non-column-span wrapper. After this patch, column-span
wrapper won't have NS_FRAME_PART_OF_IBSPLIT. That's fine because
column-span wrappers are not linked with other frames and they
shouldn't get this bit set.
Depends on D15134
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D15452
--HG--
extra : moz-landing-system : lando
In CreateColumnSpanSiblings(), aInitialBlock can be a DetailsFrame.
Therefore, when creating a non-column-span wrapper, we cannot assume
it's always a block frame. We need to use CreateContinuingFrame to
ensure the correct type of continuation is created.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D15134
--HG--
extra : moz-landing-system : lando
This hopefully will address the test-verify failures that were reported in bug 1516006.
--HG--
extra : rebase_source : d01139f16469c631eb047d21e998dfaf0d58c3a5
extra : amend_source : 8543fd2e10bf485cabaf45dfac156e6b9094ea41
Also add an IsElement check in GetElementFromPoint in the APZ code since I think
the element cast is unsound in presence of Shadow DOM.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D14355
--HG--
extra : moz-landing-system : lando
The VisualViewport events are all nice and shiny, but unfortunately not quite
what is needed for the session store.
Firstly, the spec wants the "scroll" event to be fired only when the *relative*
offset between visual and layout viewport changes. The session store however
records the absolute offset and as such is interested in when *that* changes.
Secondly, again as per the spec the events don't bubble, and with the default
DOMEventTargetHelper implementation they don't escape the VisualViewport during
capturing, either. This means that any event listener must be added directly on
the VisualViewport itself in order to capture any events.
This might have been intended because the events use the same names as the
normal "scroll"/"resize" events, and as such you cannot specify separate event
listeners for VisualViewport and non-VisualViewport "scroll" events if both
events end up being dispatched to the same element (you can only try to filter
after the fact by looking at the originalTarget of the event).
At the same time, the VisualViewport is attached to the inner Window, and so
each time you navigate, you also get a different VisualViewport object.
All of this might be totally fine from the perspective of a page script, because
in that case you won't care anyway about what happens when the current page goes
away.
From the session store perspective on the other hand (especially Fennec's non-
e10s session store design), this is rather unfortunate because we don't want to
have to keep registering event listeners
a) manually for each subframe
b) each time the page navigates
The event target chain problem could be solved by letting the scroll events
escape the VisualViewport during the capturing phase (which the spec doesn't say
anything about), but this would mean that any scroll listener attached to a
window/browser/... that uses capturing will now catch both layout and visual
viewport scroll events.
In some cases this might even be beneficial, but in others (e.g. bug 1498812
comment 21) I'd like to specifically decide which kind of scroll event to
capture. Having to look at event.originalTarget to distinguish the two kinds
might be defensible in test code, but in case this distinction would be needed
in production code as well, given the existence of a C++-based filtering helper
in nsSessionStoreUtils for another use case where (scroll) events need to be
filtered, JS-based scroll event filtering might be a bad idea.
Additionally, in any case this wouldn't solve the fundamental conflict between
the spec and the session store about *when* the "scroll" event should be fired
in the first place.
Hence I'd like to introduce a separate set of events with distinct event names,
which will be dispatched according to the requirements of our internal users
(i.e. currently the session store). To avoid potential web compatibility issues
down the road, for now these events will be dispatched only to event listeners
registered in the system group (allowing *all* Chrome event listeners cannot be
done because checking the Chrome status of each event target might be too
expensive for frequently dispatched events).
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D14046
--HG--
extra : moz-landing-system : lando
This changes the semantics of the relative visual viewport offset calculation in
the PresShell slightly, in that a missing root scroll frame will no longer
force the relative offset to zero, even if the visual viewport itself has a non-
zero scroll position [1].
On the other hand, the visual viewport's own relative offset calculations
already work that way today, in that layout and visual viewport scroll positions
are retrieved separately and then subtracted from one another regardless of
whether those values are actually valid or merely a fallback because the
PresShell/scroll frame weren't available.
[1] Though I'm not sure under what circumstances this could really be relevant.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D14686
--HG--
extra : moz-landing-system : lando
Internally, Gecko stores and updates the *absolute* offset between the visual
viewport and the page, however the spec demands that the scroll event be fired
whenever the *relative* offset between visual and layout viewport changes.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D14044
--HG--
extra : moz-landing-system : lando
The event rate throttling mechanism is modelled on the logic for "scroll" events
in nsGfxScrollFrame.cpp.
That is
1. When a request to fire an event is posted to the VisualViewport, we create a
new runnable for this and register it with the RefreshDriver. If we already
have a pending runnable, calling VisualViewport->Post...Event() becomes a
no-op.
2. When the RefreshDriver is ready, it executes the runnable, which in turn
fires the actual event and then cleans itself up.
To keep this patch manageable, we simply fire a scroll event every time the
stored visual viewport offset is changed. Because we are storing the absolute
offset of the viewport relative to the page, this behaviour doesn't match the
spec, which demands that scroll events are fired only when the relative offset
between visual and layout viewport changes. We'll fix this up in the next patch.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D14043
--HG--
extra : moz-landing-system : lando
So we do it while we're still handling re-entrant changes for SVG, since SVG can
post change hints from UpdateOverflow().
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D12102
--HG--
extra : moz-landing-system : lando
This has no behavior change, since it just expands to
NS_IMPL_QUERY_TAIL_INHERITING, but it's clearer, and clang-format understands
it.
Also, these are the only uses of this macro, so I don't think we should make
clang-format understand it.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D15125
--HG--
extra : moz-landing-system : lando
Emilio Cobos Álvarez
Coroiu Cristina
Jonathan Kew
Bogdan Tara
Sylvestre Ledru
Margareta Eliza Balazs
Ting-Yu Lin
quasicomputational
longsonr
Cameron McCormack
sharath
arthur.iakab
Andreea Pavel
Ciure Andrei
Daniel Holbert
Kartikaya Gupta
Timothy Nikkel
Jeff Muizelaar
Gurzau Raul
Jan Henning
Ting-Yu Lin
Boris Chiou