WebKit Bugzilla
New
Browse
Log In
×
Sign in with GitHub
or
Remember my login
Create Account
·
Forgot Password
Forgotten password account recovery
RESOLVED FIXED
79008
Manage node distributions in ShadowRootList, instead of each ShadowRoots.
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=79008
Summary
Manage node distributions in ShadowRootList, instead of each ShadowRoots.
Hayato Ito
Reported
2012-02-19 21:14:25 PST
To support multiple shadow roots, we have to manage lifecycle of node distributions in ShadowRootList instead of ShadowRoot.
Attachments
wip. Some layouttests becomes broken
(13.35 KB, patch)
2012-02-19 21:23 PST
,
Hayato Ito
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
ready for reviews
(13.24 KB, patch)
2012-02-19 22:46 PST
,
Hayato Ito
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
update
(13.15 KB, patch)
2012-02-19 22:57 PST
,
Hayato Ito
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
get rid of shadowRootListForThis to make responsibility clear
(13.29 KB, patch)
2012-02-20 02:51 PST
,
Hayato Ito
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
fix debug build
(13.21 KB, patch)
2012-02-20 21:26 PST
,
Hayato Ito
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
rebased to ToT
(12.66 KB, patch)
2012-02-20 23:00 PST
,
Hayato Ito
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Patch for landing
(15.30 KB, patch)
2012-02-22 18:25 PST
,
Hayato Ito
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Show Obsolete
(6)
View All
Add attachment
proposed patch, testcase, etc.
Hayato Ito
Comment 1
2012-02-19 21:23:23 PST
Created
attachment 127757
[details]
wip. Some layouttests becomes broken
Hayato Ito
Comment 2
2012-02-19 22:46:50 PST
Created
attachment 127764
[details]
ready for reviews
Shinya Kawanaka
Comment 3
2012-02-19 22:51:57 PST
Comment on
attachment 127764
[details]
ready for reviews View in context:
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=127764&action=review
> Source/WebCore/dom/ShadowRoot.h:63 > + // HTMLContentElement* insertionPointFor(Node*) const;
We can remove this?
> Source/WebCore/dom/ShadowRoot.h:65 > + // bool isSelectorActive() const;
ditto.
Hayato Ito
Comment 4
2012-02-19 22:57:52 PST
Created
attachment 127766
[details]
update
Hayato Ito
Comment 5
2012-02-19 22:58:04 PST
Comment on
attachment 127764
[details]
ready for reviews View in context:
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=127764&action=review
>> Source/WebCore/dom/ShadowRoot.h:63 >> + // HTMLContentElement* insertionPointFor(Node*) const; > > We can remove this?
Ops. Done.
>> Source/WebCore/dom/ShadowRoot.h:65 >> + // bool isSelectorActive() const; > > ditto.
Done.
Hajime Morrita
Comment 6
2012-02-20 01:21:16 PST
Comment on
attachment 127766
[details]
update View in context:
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=127766&action=review
> Source/WebCore/ChangeLog:3 > + Make ShadowRootList manage a node distribution.
Could you elaborate?
> Source/WebCore/dom/ShadowRoot.h:31 > +#include "Element.h"
This dependency is unfortunate. Why do we need this? It looks we can just modify removed functions as delegates.
Hayato Ito
Comment 7
2012-02-20 02:50:52 PST
Comment on
attachment 127766
[details]
update View in context:
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=127766&action=review
>> Source/WebCore/ChangeLog:3 >> + Make ShadowRootList manage a node distribution. > > Could you elaborate?
Sure. I've added.
>> Source/WebCore/dom/ShadowRoot.h:31 >> +#include "Element.h" > > This dependency is unfortunate. Why do we need this? It looks we can just modify removed functions as delegates.
This is required due to the inline shadowRootListForThis() function. Although I intended to get rid of this inline function in followup patches, I got rid of this function in this patch to make clear that clients should acquire ShadowRootList by themselves.
Hayato Ito
Comment 8
2012-02-20 02:51:27 PST
Created
attachment 127793
[details]
get rid of shadowRootListForThis to make responsibility clear
Shinya Kawanaka
Comment 9
2012-02-20 21:07:15 PST
Comment on
attachment 127793
[details]
get rid of shadowRootListForThis to make responsibility clear View in context:
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=127793&action=review
> Source/WebCore/dom/ShadowRoot.cpp:132 > + ASSERT(element->shadowRootList() == shadowRoot->shadowRootListForThis());
You have gotten rid of shadowRootListForThis(), right? This will make win bot red.
Hayato Ito
Comment 10
2012-02-20 21:26:21 PST
Created
attachment 127913
[details]
fix debug build
Hayato Ito
Comment 11
2012-02-20 21:26:58 PST
Thank you. Right. Fixed. (In reply to
comment #9
)
> (From update of
attachment 127793
[details]
) > View in context:
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=127793&action=review
> > > Source/WebCore/dom/ShadowRoot.cpp:132 > > + ASSERT(element->shadowRootList() == shadowRoot->shadowRootListForThis()); > > You have gotten rid of shadowRootListForThis(), right? > This will make win bot red.
Shinya Kawanaka
Comment 12
2012-02-20 22:50:33 PST
Maybe conflicted da patch for Issue 78778.
Hayato Ito
Comment 13
2012-02-20 23:00:42 PST
Created
attachment 127924
[details]
rebased to ToT
Hayato Ito
Comment 14
2012-02-20 23:01:49 PST
Since first-in should win, I've rebased this patch to ToT. (In reply to
comment #12
)
> Maybe conflicted da patch for Issue 78778.
Shinya Kawanaka
Comment 15
2012-02-22 05:06:09 PST
Can someone review this?
Dimitri Glazkov (Google)
Comment 16
2012-02-22 09:56:53 PST
Comment on
attachment 127924
[details]
rebased to ToT View in context:
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=127924&action=review
> Source/WebCore/dom/ShadowRootList.h:50 > + bool hasShadowRoot() const; > + ShadowRoot* youngestShadowRoot() const; > + ShadowRoot* oldestShadowRoot() const;
These changes look unrelated to the nature of the patch. Can you split them up into a separate patch?
Hayato Ito
Comment 17
2012-02-22 17:41:29 PST
Thank you for the review. (In reply to
comment #16
)
> (From update of
attachment 127924
[details]
) > View in context:
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=127924&action=review
> > > Source/WebCore/dom/ShadowRootList.h:50 > > + bool hasShadowRoot() const; > > + ShadowRoot* youngestShadowRoot() const; > > + ShadowRoot* oldestShadowRoot() const; > > These changes look unrelated to the nature of the patch. Can you split them up into a separate patch?
I've added these const for some reasons, but I don't remember. To recall the reasons, I've tried to build without these const. The build was successful :) You are right. I guess the original big patch from which this patch was separated requires these const. Let me land this patch after removing these const from this patch. Thank you.
Hayato Ito
Comment 18
2012-02-22 17:59:56 PST
I am wrong. It seems I tried to build on an irrelevant branch. The build failed without these const. The reason is 'ShadowRootList::host const' member function. 'hasShadowRoot()' and 'youngestShadowRoot()' are called from this const member_function. So let me land this patch without removing these const. (In reply to
comment #17
)
> Thank you for the review. > > (In reply to
comment #16
) > > (From update of
attachment 127924
[details]
[details]) > > View in context:
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=127924&action=review
> > > > > Source/WebCore/dom/ShadowRootList.h:50 > > > + bool hasShadowRoot() const; > > > + ShadowRoot* youngestShadowRoot() const; > > > + ShadowRoot* oldestShadowRoot() const; > > > > These changes look unrelated to the nature of the patch. Can you split them up into a separate patch? > > I've added these const for some reasons, but I don't remember. To recall the reasons, I've tried to build without these const. The build was successful :) You are right. > > I guess the original big patch from which this patch was separated requires these const. > > Let me land this patch after removing these const from this patch. Thank you.
Hayato Ito
Comment 19
2012-02-22 18:25:07 PST
Created
attachment 128359
[details]
Patch for landing
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 20
2012-02-22 21:14:04 PST
Comment on
attachment 128359
[details]
Patch for landing Clearing flags on attachment: 128359 Committed
r108605
: <
http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/108605
>
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 21
2012-02-22 21:14:10 PST
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.
Note
You need to
log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Top of Page
Format For Printing
XML
Clone This Bug