For a while we used the wider Paintable type for stacking context,
because it was allowed to be created by InlinePaintable and
PaintableBox. Now, when InlinePaintable type is gone, we can use more
specific PaintableBox type for a stacking context.
Resulting in a massive rename across almost everywhere! Alongside the
namespace change, we now have the following names:
* JS::NonnullGCPtr -> GC::Ref
* JS::GCPtr -> GC::Ptr
* JS::HeapFunction -> GC::Function
* JS::CellImpl -> GC::Cell
* JS::Handle -> GC::Root
Bring the names of various boxes closer to spec language. This should
hopefully make things easier to understand and hack on. :^)
Some notable changes:
- LayoutNode -> Layout::Node
- LayoutBox -> Layout::Box
- LayoutBlock -> Layout::BlockBox
- LayoutReplaced -> Layout::ReplacedBox
- LayoutDocument -> Layout::InitialContainingBlockBox
- LayoutText -> Layout::TextNode
- LayoutInline -> Layout::InlineNode
Note that this is not strictly a "box tree" as we also hang inline/text
nodes in the same tree, and they don't generate boxes. (Instead, they
contribute line box fragments to their containing block!)
The text cursor follows slightly different "intuitive" rules than the
regular hit testing. Clicking past the right edge of a text box should
still "hit" the text box, and place the cursor at its end, for example.
We solve this by adding a HitTestType enum that is passed to hit_test()
and determines whether past-the-edge candidates are considered.
The stacking context tree doesn't affect layout at all, so let's move
it into the Painting/ directory. I'm not sure yet if it's worth going
for a fullly separate painting tree. So far I'm thinking a stacking
context tree with pointers into the layout tree might be enough.
2020-06-18 21:42:19 +02:00
Renamed from Libraries/LibWeb/Layout/StackingContext.h (Browse further)
