[webkit-reviews] review granted: [Bug 110341] CSS Flexbox: dynamically applied align-items doesn't affect item alignment : [Attachment 190336] Patch

[bugzilla-daemon at webkit.org]

Ojan Vafai <ojan at chromium.org> has granted Tony Chang <tony at chromium.org>'s
request for review:
Bug 110341: CSS Flexbox: dynamically applied align-items doesn't affect item
alignment
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=110341

Attachment 190336: Patch
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=190336&action=review

------- Additional Comments from Ojan Vafai <ojan at chromium.org>
View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=190336&action=review


> Source/WebCore/ChangeLog:10
> +	   The problem was with flex items that were previously stretch but
didn't change width,
> +	   we would not lay them out again. Since they were not layed out, we
use the old stretch
> +	   value. Fix this by marking flex items that were stretch as needing
layout.

This grammar is a bit broken. I see what you're saying, but might be worth
cleaning up.

> Source/WebCore/rendering/RenderFlexibleBox.cpp:316
> +    if (oldStyle && oldStyle->alignItems() == AlignStretch && diff ==
StyleDifferenceLayout) {
> +	   for (RenderBox* child = firstChildBox(); child; child =
child->nextSiblingBox()) {
> +	       EAlignItems previousAlignment = resolveAlignment(oldStyle,
child->style());
> +	       if (previousAlignment == AlignStretch && previousAlignment !=
resolveAlignment(style(), child->style()))
> +		   child->setChildNeedsLayout(true, MarkOnlyThis);
> +	   }
> +    }

I think this is correct, but it's tricky enough that it could use a brief "why"
comment, e.g. why we only care about the alignment going from stretch to
something else.