Let containing blocks layout their absolute descendants, not parents #41488
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
facebook-github-bot
added
the
CLA Signed
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D51182593 |
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/react-native
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 14, 2023
…acebook#41488) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 14, 2023
…acebook#1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 14, 2023
…acebook#1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/react-native
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 14, 2023
…acebook#41488) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 14, 2023
…acebook#1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/react-native
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 14, 2023
…acebook#41488) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Differential Revision: D51182593
Base commit: 974e584 |
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 15, 2023
…acebook#1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/react-native
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 15, 2023
…acebook#41488) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 15, 2023
…acebook#1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/react-native
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 15, 2023
…acebook#41488) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
force-pushed
the
export-D51182593
branch
from
61f37fa
to
dfe7f3c
Compare
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D51182593 |
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 15, 2023
…acebook#1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 15, 2023
…acebook#1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/react-native
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 15, 2023
…acebook#41488) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/react-native
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 15, 2023
…acebook#41488) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 15, 2023
…acebook#1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/react-native
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 15, 2023
…acebook#41488) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
force-pushed
the
export-D51182593
branch
from
dfe7f3c
to
57ef6dc
Compare
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D51182593 |
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 15, 2023
…acebook#1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/react-native
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 15, 2023
…acebook#41488) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 15, 2023
…acebook#1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/react-native
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 15, 2023
…acebook#41488) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/react-native
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 4, 2023
…acebook#41488) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 4, 2023
…acebook#1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/react-native
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 4, 2023
…acebook#41488) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 4, 2023
…acebook#1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/react-native
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 4, 2023
…acebook#41488) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
force-pushed
the
export-D51182593
branch
from
bb889bd
to
5c87eee
Compare
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 4, 2023
…acebook#1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/react-native
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 4, 2023
…acebook#41488) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D51182593 |
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 4, 2023
…acebook#1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/react-native
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 4, 2023
…acebook#41488) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
force-pushed
the
export-D51182593
branch
from
5c87eee
to
86cd9d9
Compare
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 4, 2023
…acebook#1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D51182593 |
added 2 commits
December 4, 2023 15:21
Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1454 One of the most basic aspects of statically positioned nodes is that [insets do not apply to them](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/position#static). So I put a guard inside `Node::relativePosition` where we take that into account when setting the position. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D50507808
…acebook#41488) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 4, 2023
…acebook#1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 4, 2023
…acebook#1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
force-pushed
the
export-D51182593
branch
from
86cd9d9
to
8509cbc
Compare
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/react-native
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 4, 2023
…acebook#41488) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D51182593 |
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 4, 2023
…acebook#1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
joevilches
pushed a commit
to joevilches/react-native
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 4, 2023
…acebook#41488) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593
facebook-github-bot
pushed a commit
to facebook/litho
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 5, 2023
Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593 fbshipit-source-id: 88b5730f7f4fec4f33ec64288618e23363091857
facebook-github-bot
pushed a commit
to facebook/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 5, 2023
…1470) Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#41488 Pull Request resolved: #1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593 fbshipit-source-id: 88b5730f7f4fec4f33ec64288618e23363091857
|
This pull request has been merged in 33d6a59. |
Othinn
pushed a commit
to Othinn/react-native
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 9, 2024
…acebook#41488) Summary: Pull Request resolved: facebook#41488 X-link: facebook/yoga#1470 The way we plan on implementing `position: static` is by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design. This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for `layoutAbsoluteChild`. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now. Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D51182593 fbshipit-source-id: 88b5730f7f4fec4f33ec64288618e23363091857
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary:
The way we plan on implementing
position: staticis by changing how we lay out absolutely positioned nodes. Instead of letting their direct parent lay them out we are going to let their containing block handle it. This is useful because by the time the containing block gets to this step it will already know its size, which is needed to ensure that absolute nodes can get the right value with percentage units. Additionally, it means that we can "translate" the position of the absolute nodes to be relative to their parent fairly easily, instead of some second pass that would not be possible with a different design.This change just gets the core pieces of this process going. It makes it so that containing blocks will layout out absolute descendants that they contain. We also pass in the containing block size to the owner size args for
layoutAbsoluteChild. This new path will only happen if we have the errata turned off. If there is no positioned ancestor for a given node we just assume the root is. This is not exactly how it works on the web - there is a notion of an initial containing block - but we are not implementing that as of right now.Differential Revision: D51182593