[webkit-qt] printing unit tests
milian.wolff at kdab.com
Wed Apr 18 08:02:44 PDT 2012
On Wednesday 18 April 2012 16:14:05 Simon Hausmann wrote:
> On Friday, April 13, 2012 04:38:16 PM ext Milian Wolff wrote:
> > On Wednesday 11 April 2012 20:05:39 Milian Wolff wrote:
> > > Hey all,
> > >
> > > I'm interested in improving the printing support of the QtWebKit port.
> > >
> > > I notice that a lot of unit tests are skipped and that apparently
> > > isPrinting() is not implemented/handled at all yet.
> > >
> > > For quite some time now I'm trying to figure out what exactly would be
> > > required to get this done but it seems to be far from easy... Is there
> > > any
> > > documentation besides the chromium spagetthi test code on how the output
> > > should look like or when to output what (image, text, both, ...)?
> > >
> > > As far as I can see, I will probably have to handle the isPrinting()
> > > mode
> > > in DumpRenderTreeQt.cpp ~ ::dump() in the if(m_dumpPixels) branch.
> > > Currently, that only paints the viewportSize() to an image. If I'm not
> > > mistaken, one needs to create a copy or QWebFrame::print, similar to
> > > chromiums'
> > > WebViewHost::paintPagesWithBoundaries. But what are the requirements on
> > > the
> > > output? Is there *any* documentation on what the tests should output?
> > I've done this now, see the attached patch. It kind-of-works, e.g. for
> > media- queries-print.html: http://imagebin.org/207870
> Like Andras said, patches are best kept in Bugzilla where we have a
> beautiful tool for reviewing them - line by line :)
> > But for setPrint.html I see horrible render bug which I do not the reason
> > to:
> > http://imagebin.org/207871
> > Note how the right border of the box is not properly drawn. Furthermore,
> > the box is one pixel too high, or well - the bottom border is painted one
> > pixel too far below. Compare to e.g.
> > LayoutTests/platform/mac/printing/setPrinting- expected.png to see how it
> > should look like.
> > So... has anyone an idea of what could be going on here?
> I don't know off-hand, but these one-pixel-off differences are exactly one
> of the reasons why pixel tests are difficult to maintain. Different
> software rasterizers for example have different interpretations about pixel
> alignment, which may or may not be a possible reason for this.
> I think you're on the right track with the patch (passing the height) and I
> _do_ think it is worthwhile to add pixel test support to DRT for
> isPrinting(), but for this particular bug I would also suggest to resort to
> the approach of trying to pass the existing *-expected.txt tests. If the
> existing tests don't cover this particular issue (missing height), then we
> need a different way to compare the symptoms.
Yes, as far as I can see there is no unit test yet which covers the bug I
mention above. Still, I think it would be good to have the other printing unit
tests (which are pixel tests) to run as well, just for completeness sake.
On IRC I was hinted at reftests and will try to figure out a test case for the
issue above in another bug report. But for now I'll continue a bit in getting
the existing unit tests to run.
Milian Wolff | milian.wolff at kdab.com | Software Engineer
KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH&Co KG, a KDAB Group company
Tel. Germany +49-30-521325470, Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090
KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-independent software solutions
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
More information about the webkit-qt