| Summary: | [CSS Cascade Layers] Initial support | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | WebKit | Reporter: | Antti Koivisto <koivisto> | ||||||
| Component: | CSS | Assignee: | Nobody <webkit-unassigned> | ||||||
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||||||||
| Severity: | Normal | CC: | emilio, esprehn+autocc, ews-watchlist, glenn, gyuyoung.kim, macpherson, menard, simon.fraser, webkit-bug-importer | ||||||
| Priority: | P2 | Keywords: | InRadar | ||||||
| Version: | WebKit Nightly Build | ||||||||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||||||||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||||||||
| Bug Depends on: | |||||||||
| Bug Blocks: | 220779 | ||||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||
|
Description
Antti Koivisto
2021-08-26 01:25:41 PDT
Created attachment 436483 [details]
patch
Created attachment 436491 [details]
patch
Comment on attachment 436491 [details] patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=436491&action=review > Source/WebCore/css/StyleRule.h:265 > + Variant<CascadeLayerName, Vector<CascadeLayerName>> m_nameVariant; Is this preferable to just always using a Vector<>? Or is a name list with one item different from a simple name? > Source/WebCore/css/StyleRuleType.h:40 > Namespace = 10, What happened to 9? Why do we number these from here on? > Source/WebCore/css/parser/CSSAtRuleID.h:51 > + CSSAtRuleLayer = 13, Not sure why we need exploit values here? > Source/WebCore/style/RuleSet.cpp:510 > + // FIXME: This is not correct when adding a sublayer to an already registered layer after it has gained siblings. Reference a bug url? > Source/WebCore/style/RuleSet.h:196 > + // FIXME: These should be in stack. in a stack? on the stack? > Is this preferable to just always using a Vector<>? Or is a name list with > one item different from a simple name? One for the statement case, another for the block case. See the different constructor variants. I just used Vector initially but this ended up reading better. Otherwise I also need a separate bool to differentiate between the cases. > What happened to 9? Why do we number these from here on? Needs some historical digging. > Not sure why we need exploit values here? We don't, I was just sticking with the existing style. > Reference a bug url? > in a stack? on the stack? I'll be fixing both shortly. Committed r281701 (241051@main): <https://commits.webkit.org/241051@main> All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug and clearing flags on attachment 436491 [details]. |