This should be both a memory and speed win for pages using a lot of
Shadow DOM.
In order to make the cache properly work we need to start keying media query
results on the actual StyleSheetContents, as that's what we share on Gecko, but
that should all be fine.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D107266
It was clarified that the percentages are weights, and two weights are
now allowed. Missing percentages are computed as 100% - the other or
50%. Other than that, commas are required etc, which is good since
that's how I implemented it originally.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D107295
This is straight-forward and builds on the color animation code. This
implements only the <percentage> syntax, not the whole <color-adjuster>
syntax, which seems fairly more complex.
Of course, this only uses sRGB because that's all the colors we support,
but it should be feasible to extend to lab() / lch() colors once we
support those.
I believe this subset of syntax is useful and worth implementing, so
people can play with it and say if it's useful.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D106698
This will prevent growing them when introducing fit-content(<length>).
This can _almost_ be derived, if it wasn't because of the quirky stuff.
I think the macro is probably good enough for now but let me know if you
disagree.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D106713
This will prevent growing them when introducing fit-content(<length>).
This can _almost_ be derived, if it wasn't because of the quirky stuff.
I think the macro is probably good enough for now but let me know if you
disagree.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D106713
I also update the wpt becasue it seems the original one lets <ratio>
support the addition. However, the spec says "Addition of <ratio>s is not
possible".
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D106219
And alias :-moz-ui-valid and :-moz-ui-invalid to them.
There are CSSWG resolutions for these for quite a while, and spec for
user-invalid.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D105966
No other browser supports anything like this and we don't even have
internal users. Only uses of this I've found on the wild were just
resetting the box shadow internal styling we added in bug 582277 (and
since removed in bug 600151).
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D105955
This reduces the amount of assembly instructions generated by this
function from 18k+ to ~800.
This should make reasoning about its stack space usage sane, and should
fix the ASAN stack overflows, but also we should take this regardless,
because it's saner and makes reading it simpler.
I also think that the writing_mode shenanigans is fixing a bug (I think
before this, we'd pick the first physical value which mapped to any of
the properties, which is wrong), but I haven't bothered looking for a
test-case that fails before my patch. The relevant WPTs
(css/css-logical/animation*) still pass.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D105342
This brings the time down to 1.6ms from 4.8ms on the test-case in the
bug. This should be improvable too, but I think this is a nice
improvement for regular styling as well.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D105187
This doesn't use a full bitmap for every single rule type, as we only expect
that keyframe, page, and style rules will be checked.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D104949
This brings the time down to 1.6ms from 4.8ms on the test-case in the
bug. This should be improvable too, but I think this is a nice
improvement for regular styling as well.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D105187
Actually, there's not so much we can improve right now, in the sense
that:
* We need the ::-moz-page-content pseudo-element to be able to set
`display` on the page, since that's a style rule rather than a @page
rule. We could get away without it.
* Keeping the current code-path (slightly cleaned up) is less code, for
now at least. We can have a separate code-path or what not that
actually performs the @page rule selector-matching and what not if
needed when we get to named pages or other page selectors. Selectors
like :first should be pretty trivial to implement, actually.
We make some paged mode anon boxes non-inheriting anon boxes. This
allows us to share the styles and is generally nicer. They don't need to
inherit from anywhere.
We could remove the origin handling and don't look at UA rules or what
not, but it seems pretty harmless to do that.
We also fix the name of the pseudo-elements to match the capitalization.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D104772
Actually, there's not so much we can improve right now, in the sense
that:
* We need the ::-moz-page-content pseudo-element to be able to set
`display` on the page, since that's a style rule rather than a @page
rule. We could get away without it.
* Keeping the current code-path (slightly cleaned up) is less code, for
now at least. We can have a separate code-path or what not that
actually performs the @page rule selector-matching and what not if
needed when we get to named pages or other page selectors. Selectors
like :first should be pretty trivial to implement, actually.
We make some paged mode anon boxes non-inheriting anon boxes. This
allows us to share the styles and is generally nicer. They don't need to
inherit from anywhere.
We could remove the origin handling and don't look at UA rules or what
not, but it seems pretty harmless to do that.
We also fix the name of the pseudo-elements to match the capitalization.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D104772
Some GTK themes use very soft colors for selection backgrounds, using
darker colors for the text. This makes the tab and focus outlines in the
tab bar not have sufficient contrast with usual backgrounds.
I needed to do this for bug 1690778, but it seems worth doing it on the
front-end as well.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D104547
It's only used to disambiguate between the one-argument and the trait
version of Keyword::parse. Instead, just explicitly use the trait
version, so that we don't need to specify it.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D104328
It's only used to disambiguate between the one-argument and the trait
version of Keyword::parse. Instead, just explicitly use the trait
version, so that we don't need to specify it.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D104328
This shipped in 85, we can remove the feature flag now. Keep
:-moz-focusring as an alias to :focus-visible at parse time.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D103752
This shipped in 85, we can remove the feature flag now. Keep
:-moz-focusring as an alias to :focus-visible at parse time.
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D103752
