When double-clicking on a default anonymous <summary> element, the first
eMouseClick will make the summary element being removed from the
document. This generates an assert in
PresShell::HandleEventWithTarget().
To prevent this assert, ensure the mouseContent is in document before
dispatching the eMouseDoubleClick event.
Since GetCrossShadowCurrentDoc() was deprecated, replace it with
GetComposedDoc().
--HG--
extra : commitid : K9pCdof8z3f
extra : rebase_source : 3adfdb9938de30fd0ca365168c33dcdcef8ca285
If a <details> lacks a direct <summary> child, we need to construct a
default one.
--HG--
extra : commitid : ApnP20Mrr33
extra : rebase_source : 4b059f4e7fa32bac665487aa8a266ba58597b184
Our behavior on these tests is reasonably close to matching Chromium
thanks to the combination of patches 1, 3, and 4, and 5.
--HG--
extra : commitid : BzErQKgv86B
This restores the quirky behavior for text inputs, which was removed by
patch 2, but only halfway (for width but not max-width), which matches
Chromium and Edge.
--HG--
extra : commitid : 7uk3XdYc1LC
This just reorders the if-else chain to change which conditions are
tested first. Prior to patch 1, the order didn't matter, but with patch
1, the order does matter, and the order that we happened to have was the
opposite of the one that matches Chromium and Edge.
--HG--
extra : commitid : 6sFft3gnM2g
This reduces the set of elements to which this quirky behavior applies.
This matches the behavior of Chromium and Edge.
--HG--
extra : commitid : 9qz7ODJhNzS
This (modulo changes in later patches) matches the behavior of Chromium
and Edge. It increases the set of elements to which this quirky
behavior applies.
--HG--
extra : commitid : 4nWEgnUB0rt
What's happening here is that we enter an infinite loop by oscillating
between two states. The code assumes that (a) the available space will
never grow, only stay the same or shrink, and (b) that we should break
out of the loop if it stays the same. This also means we hit the
assertion about the available space growing every other time through the
loop.
This is in the inner loop in nsBlockFrame::ReflowBlockFrame that was
introduced in https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/80ef9bb2c2e9 .
The problem is fundamentally a logic error in that code. The makes the
assumption that if you reduce the width available to a block formatting
context or replaced block-level element, its height does not shrink.
(The "replaced block" (really block formatting context) in this case, as
in the original testcase, is a scroll frame. I didn't debug the
original testcase enough to figure out what caused its sizing
characteristics, although a percentage-width image does seem like the
most likely candidate.)
Without the patch, the reftest test (but not reference) hangs, as does
the semi-simplified test in the bug (given a narrow window).
With the patch, neither the semi-simplified test in the bug nor the
reference hangs, and the reftest passes.
--HG--
extra : commitid : APy8PfXlvvz
Per request in bug 1240917 comment 15, we decided not to show caret when
single press on an empty input. This effectively reverts the work in Bug
1230582.
--HG--
extra : commitid : IjKGpqAR6zP
extra : rebase_source : d476618b4f419cf2d96bb33264cfd8ccb6e3fa61
nsImageFrame::OnSizeAvailable will update the intrinsic ratio and ask for a reflow. Then nsImageFrame::NotifyNewCurrentRequest will be called when the image is finished loading. It previously would do a predictive decode if the intrinsic size hadn't changed.
This was a mistake in http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/146f1bea4147 (bug 1151359).
OnSizeAvailable has this structure:
if (intrinsicSizeChanged && gotInitialReflow) {
if (!sizeConstrained) {
requestReflow();
}
}
NotifyNewCurrentRequest has this structure:
if (gotInitialReflow) {
if (!sizeConstrained && intrinsicSizeChanged) {
requestReflow();
}
}
Bug 1151359 added a predictive decode in a new else branch to both inner if statements. The meaning of this is obviously quite different.
