CLOSED FIXED 40846
[Qt] GraphicsLayerQt delay seems unnecessary. 
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40846
Summary [Qt] GraphicsLayerQt delay seems unnecessary.
Sam Magnuson
Reported Friday, June 18, 2010 7:01:14 PM UTC
I had noticed that if I had a delay in my animation it would get offset strangely. Further investigation makes me believe that the animation takes care of firing after the delay on its own and GraphicsLayerQt.cpp doesn't need to delay the animation's start. Is there a test case that shows its required? The attached test case seems to indicate otherwise.
Attachments
Proposed patch (with testcase) (8.34 KB, patch)
2010-06-18 11:15 PDT, Sam Magnuson 		no flags
DetailsFormatted DiffDiff
Rediff against trunk (2.57 KB, patch)
2010-06-22 16:13 PDT, Sam Magnuson 		no flags
DetailsFormatted DiffDiff
Show Obsolete (1) View All Add attachment proposed patch, testcase, etc.
Sam Magnuson
Comment 1 Friday, June 18, 2010 7:15:00 PM UTC
Created attachment 59137 [details] Proposed patch (with testcase)
Sam Magnuson
Comment 2 Friday, June 18, 2010 7:15:43 PM UTC
To actually use that testcase I will need bug #40841 to be applied as well as the items will remain transparent (and the timing won't be seen)
Noam Rosenthal
Comment 3 Saturday, June 19, 2010 1:40:40 AM UTC
Can you make sure it works with LayoutTests/animations/fill-mode-transform.html? It's an existing test case that has delay and uses AC.
Sam Magnuson
Comment 4 Monday, June 21, 2010 5:59:58 PM UTC
(In reply to comment #3) > Can you make sure it works with LayoutTests/animations/fill-mode-transform.html? > It's an existing test case that has delay and uses AC. Thanks for the pointer to that test, however, it fails to pass. When I take out my change it continues to fail in the same way - so I'm not thinking my change is causing the failure. Has this test passed completely before?
Noam Rosenthal
Comment 5 Monday, June 21, 2010 6:42:53 PM UTC
As long as your change doesn't create a regression wrt delays, I have no problems with it. I'll look further into that test, I think it's unstable.
Sam Magnuson
Comment 6 Monday, June 21, 2010 6:53:05 PM UTC
(In reply to comment #5) > As long as your change doesn't create a regression wrt delays, I have no problems with it. I'll look further into that test, I think it's unstable. I'm not seeing any worse behaviour, and in the test that I included in here it makes the graphicsview behave the same as when disabled.
Sam Magnuson
Comment 7 Wednesday, June 23, 2010 12:13:20 AM UTC
Created attachment 59439 [details] Rediff against trunk
Noam Rosenthal
Comment 8 Friday, June 25, 2010 9:20:21 PM UTC
*** Bug 40778 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
WebKit Commit Bot
Comment 9 Monday, June 28, 2010 4:47:45 PM UTC
Comment on attachment 59439 [details] Rediff against trunk Clearing flags on attachment: 59439 Committed r62010: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/62010>
WebKit Commit Bot
Comment 10 Monday, June 28, 2010 4:47:50 PM UTC
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.
Simon Hausmann
Comment 11 Thursday, July 1, 2010 9:25:51 AM UTC
Revision r62010 cherry-picked into qtwebkit-2.0 with commit 45fa2b8b4d6906275f948b93076c38f9539427b0
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.