The main users were the `dump()` functions, which now dump their
children instead, which is more correct anyway.
The others are for serializing numeric values, so
NumericCalculationNode's to_string() is renamed to value_to_string
() and used for those for convenience.
This gets us 37 new subtest passes in css/css-values, and 13 passes in
our other in-tree tests (and probably some random other ones!)
As noted in comments, a few parts of this algorithm have ad-hoc
behaviour to handle some issues in the spec.
Having multiple kinds of node that hold numeric values made things more
complicated than they needed to be, and we were already converting
ConstantCalculationNodes to NumericCalculationNodes in the first
simplification pass that happens at parse-time, so they didn't exist
after that.
As noted, the spec allows for other contexts to introduce their own
numeric keywords, which might be resolved later than parse-time. We'll
need a different mechanism to support those, but
ConstantCalculationNode could not have done so anyway.
If a calculation was simplified down to a single numeric node, then most
of the time we can instead return a regular StyleValue, for example
`calc(2px + 3px)` would be simplified down to a `5px` LengthStyleValue.
This means that parse_calculated_value() can't return a
CalculatedStyleValue directly, and its callers all have to handle
non-calculated values as well as calculated ones.
This simplification is reflected in the new test results. Serialization
is not yet correct in all cases but we're closer than we were. :^)
Calc simplification eventually produces a single style-value as its
output. This extra context data will let us know whether a calculated
number should be treated as a `<number>` or an `<integer>`, so that for
example, `z-index: 12` and `z-index: calc(12)` both produce an
`IntegerStyleValue` containing 12.
Calc simplification (which I'm working towards) involves repeatedly
deriving a new calculation tree from an existing one, and in many
cases, either the whole result or a portion of it will be identical to
that of the original. Using RefPtr lets us avoid making unnecessary
copies. As a bonus it will also make it easier to return either `this`
or a new node.
In future we could also cache commonly-used nodes, similar to how we do
so for 1px and 0px LengthStyleValues and various keywords.
Initially I added this to the existing CalculationContext, but in
reality, we have some data at parse-time and different data at
resolve-time, so it made more sense to keep those separate.
Instead of needing a variety of methods for resolving a Foo, depending
on whether we have a Layout::Node available, or a percentage basis, or
a length resolution context... put those in a
CalculationResolutionContext, and just pass that one thing to these
methods. This also removes the need for separate resolve_*_percentage()
methods, because we can just pass the percentage basis in to the regular
resolve_foo() method.
This also corrects the issue that *any* calculation may need to resolve
lengths, but we previously only passed a length resolution context to
specific types in some situations. Now, they can all have one available,
though it's up to the caller to provide it.
Various places in the spec allow for `<number> | <percentage>`, but this
is either/or, and they are not allowed to be combined like dimensions
and percentages are. (For example, `calc(12 + 50%)` is never valid.)
User code generally doesn't need to care about this distinction, but it
does now need to check if a calculation resolves to a number, or to a
percentage, instead of a single call.
The existing parse_number_percentage[_value]() methods have been kept
for simplicity, but updated to check for number/percentage separately.
When we originally implemented calc(), the result of a calculation was
guaranteed to be a single CSS type like a Length or Angle. However, CSS
Values 4 now allows more complex type arithmetic, which is represented
by the CSSNumericType class. Using that directly makes us more correct,
and allows us to remove a large amount of now ad-hoc code.
Unfortunately this is a large commit but the changes it makes are
interconnected enough that doing one at a time causes test
regressions.
In no particular order:
- Update our "determine the type of a calculation" code to match the
newest spec, which sets percent hints in a couple more cases. (One of
these we're skipping for now, I think it fails because of the FIXMEs
in CSSNumericType::matches_foo().)
- Make the generated math-function-parsing code aware of the difference
between arguments being the same type, and being "consistent" types,
for each function. Otherwise those extra percent hints would cause
them to fail validation incorrectly.
- Use the CSSNumericType as the type for the CalculationResult.
- Calculate and assign each math function's type in its constructor,
instead of calculating it repeatedly on-demand.
The `CalculationNode::resolved_type()` method is now entirely unused and
has been removed.
This reverts commit 76daba3069.
We're going to need separate types for the JS-exposed style values, so
it doesn't make sense for us to match their names with our internal
types.
2024-12-21 18:14:28 +01:00
Renamed from Libraries/LibWeb/CSS/StyleValues/CSSMathValue.h (Browse further)
