Fix issue with alternating flex direction and percent postions #44792
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: D58172416 |
…tive padding defined on parent (facebook#44791) Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1662 This should fix facebook/yoga#1657. Rather insidious bug but we had code like ``` // The total padding/border for a given axis does not depend on the direction // so hardcoding LTR here to avoid piping direction to this function return node->style().computeInlineStartPaddingAndBorder( axis, Direction::LTR, widthSize) + node->style().computeInlineEndPaddingAndBorder( axis, Direction::LTR, widthSize); ``` That comment is NOT true if someone sets both the physical edge and relative edge. So like paddingLeft and paddingEnd for RTL. This diff simply pipes the direction to that spot to use instead of hardcoding LTR. Every file changed is just to pipe `direction`. Differential Revision: D58169843
Summary: X-link: facebook/yoga#1663 Fixing facebook/yoga#1658. We had a problem where if a child had a different flex direction than its parent, and it also set a position as a percent, it would look at the wrong axis to evaluate the percent. What was happening was we were passing in the container's mainAxis size and crossAxis size to use to evaluate the position size if it was a percent. However, we matched these sizes with the main/cross axis of the child - which is wrong if the flex direction is different. I changed it so that the function just takes in ownerWidth and ownerHeight then calls isRow to determine which one to use for the main/cross axis position. This reduces the ambiguity quite a bit imo. Differential Revision: D58172416
joevilches
force-pushed
the
export-D58172416
branch
from
7d3b6b7
to
df71393
Compare
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D58172416 |
Base commit: 2d9e54b |
facebook-github-bot
pushed a commit
to facebook/litho
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 11, 2024
Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#44792 X-link: facebook/yoga#1663 Fixing facebook/yoga#1658. We had a problem where if a child had a different flex direction than its parent, and it also set a position as a percent, it would look at the wrong axis to evaluate the percent. What was happening was we were passing in the container's mainAxis size and crossAxis size to use to evaluate the position size if it was a percent. However, we matched these sizes with the main/cross axis of the child - which is wrong if the flex direction is different. I changed it so that the function just takes in ownerWidth and ownerHeight then calls isRow to determine which one to use for the main/cross axis position. This reduces the ambiguity quite a bit imo. Changelog: [Internal] Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D58172416 fbshipit-source-id: eafd8069e03493fc56c41a76879d1ad9b7e9236d
facebook-github-bot
pushed a commit
to facebook/yoga
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 11, 2024
Summary: X-link: facebook/react-native#44792 Pull Request resolved: #1663 Fixing #1658. We had a problem where if a child had a different flex direction than its parent, and it also set a position as a percent, it would look at the wrong axis to evaluate the percent. What was happening was we were passing in the container's mainAxis size and crossAxis size to use to evaluate the position size if it was a percent. However, we matched these sizes with the main/cross axis of the child - which is wrong if the flex direction is different. I changed it so that the function just takes in ownerWidth and ownerHeight then calls isRow to determine which one to use for the main/cross axis position. This reduces the ambiguity quite a bit imo. Changelog: [Internal] Reviewed By: NickGerleman Differential Revision: D58172416 fbshipit-source-id: eafd8069e03493fc56c41a76879d1ad9b7e9236d
|
This pull request has been merged in 5b3a321. |
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:
Fixing facebook/yoga#1658. We had a problem where if a child had a different flex direction than its parent, and it also set a position as a percent, it would look at the wrong axis to evaluate the percent. What was happening was we were passing in the container's mainAxis size and crossAxis size to use to evaluate the position size if it was a percent. However, we matched these sizes with the main/cross axis of the child - which is wrong if the flex direction is different.
I changed it so that the function just takes in ownerWidth and ownerHeight then calls isRow to determine which one to use for the main/cross axis position. This reduces the ambiguity quite a bit imo.
Differential Revision: D58172416