[webkit-reviews] review denied: [Bug 102784] Percentage width replaced element incorrectly rendered when intrinsic size changed : [Attachment 176190] Patch

Tue Nov 27 11:35:46 PST 2012

Tony Chang <tony at chromium.org> has denied KyungTae Kim <ktf.kim at samsung.com>'s
request for review:
Bug 102784: Percentage width replaced element incorrectly rendered when
intrinsic size changed
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102784

Attachment 176190: Patch
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=176190&action=review

------- Additional Comments from Tony Chang <tony at chromium.org>
View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=176190&action=review

We don't want to throw away this optimization.

Instead of always forcing a layout, can't we check to see if there's a percent
logical width, min-width, or max-width and only layout when needed?  Also, this
seems like it's only a problem in shrink-to-fit objects
(sizesLogicalWidthToFitContent returns true).  We could maybe detect that as
well.

> LayoutTests/ChangeLog:11
> +	   * fast/css/percent-width-img-src-change-expected.html: Added.
> +	   * fast/css/percent-width-img-src-change.html: Added.

I would make this a dumpAsText/js-test-pre.js test that checks the size of the
image and makes sure it is 64.	The color is confusing since red boxes normally
mean fail.

> LayoutTests/fast/css/percent-width-img-src-change.html:1
> +<html>

Missing <!DOCTYPE html>

> LayoutTests/fast/css/percent-width-img-src-change.html:6
> +    htmlImageElements = document.getElementsByClassName("imgForChange");
> +    for (i = 0; i < htmlImageElements.length; i++)

Nit: 'var' for local variables, ++i instead of i++.