This migrates TextNode::text_for_rendering() to Utf16String and deals
with the fallout. As a consequence, this effectively reverts commit
3df83dade8.
The layout test expecation file updates are because we now express text
lengths and offsets in UTF-16 code units.
The selection-over-multiple-code-units expectation file update actually
represents a correctness fix. Our result now matches Firefox.
Browsers such as Chrome and Firefox apply an arbitrary scale to the
current font size if `normal` is used for `line-height`. Firefox uses
1.2 while Chrome uses 1.15. Let's go with the latter for now, it's
relatively easy to change if we ever want to go back on that decision.
This also requires updating the expectations for a lot of layout tests.
The upside of this is that it's a bit easier to compare our layout
results to other browsers', especially Chrome.
This is a part of refactoring towards making the paintable tree
independent of the layout tree. Now, instead of transferring text
fragments from the layout tree to the paintable tree during the layout
commit phase, we allocate separate PaintableFragments that contain only
the information necessary for painting. Doing this also allows us to
get rid LineBoxes, as they are used only during layout.
This patch makes a few changes to the way we calculate line-height:
- `line-height: normal` is now resolved using metrics from the used
font (specifically, round(A + D + lineGap)).
- `line-height: calc(...)` is now resolved at style compute time.
- `line-height` values are now absolutized at style compute time.
As a consequence of the above, we no longer need to walk the DOM
ancestor chain looking for line-heights during style computation.
Instead, values are inherited, resolved and absolutized locally.
This is not only much faster, but also makes our line-height metrics
match those of other engines like Gecko and Blink.
This is a simple mapping of some code-points to others.
I was going to use a ref test for this, but without knowing that the
font contains the code-points (which SerenitySans does not) we'd be
comparing a series of replacement characters to a series of replacement
characters, which doesn't tell you if they're the right code-points
underneath.
