Re: [Dillo-dev]Bug #1015 From: Sebastian Geerken - 2001-02-27 21:42 Hi, Solving this bug "quick and dirty" (not suitable for arbitrary nested widgets, only for this special case) works. I'm now developing a common solution. On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 05:27:22PM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > Sebastian, > > > I've found the reason and I'm thinking about how to solve it best. > > > > A few details: When a widget within the page changes its size, this > > will (in an idle function) result in a call of > > a_Dw_widget_size_request for the page widget, and then > > a_Dw_widget_size_allocate, with the requisition becoming a part of > > the allocation. The latter checks whether the allocation has changed, > > and this is not always the case in the test page, since a few images > > cause the page to have its final size. > > > > So, the condition, when a_Dw_widget_size_allocate can omit sending > > the "size_allocate" signal, can be wrong in some cases. I forgot: emitting the "size_allocate" signal will call Dw_page_size_allocate, which then allocates the children. Without this, they have zero sizes. This was exactly the case. > It looks like the problem we have, but why it works sometimes? > Because the idle function can be triggered either before or after > the page allocation gets its final size? If this is true, then > we're very close to 0.4.0 release! (Actually the idle function may be triggered several times, depending on whether data is available from the Cache module or not.) The bug does not occur, when all image sizes get known at quite the same time. In this case, the idle function is called the last time, after the page widget knows the correct sizes of the image widgets. Sebastian Re: [Dillo-dev]Bug #1015 From: Jorge Arellano Cid - 2001-02-27 20:47 Sebastian, > I've found the reason and I'm thinking about how to solve it best. > > A few details: When a widget within the page changes its size, this > will (in an idle function) result in a call of > a_Dw_widget_size_request for the page widget, and then > a_Dw_widget_size_allocate, with the requisition becoming a part of > the allocation. The latter checks whether the allocation has changed, > and this is not always the case in the test page, since a few images > cause the page to have its final size. > > So, the condition, when a_Dw_widget_size_allocate can omit sending > the "size_allocate" signal, can be wrong in some cases. It looks like the problem we have, but why it works sometimes? Because the idle function can be triggered either before or after the page allocation gets its final size? If this is true, then we're very close to 0.4.0 release! > PS: Jorge, what is the matter with your ematic account? I got a > failure notice mail, saying: "550 Command RCPT User > not OK". Ematic isn't very stable, I have some problems from time to time; if this persists, let me know and I'll switch back to nettaxi. Jorge.- Re: [Dillo-dev]Bug #1015 From: Sebastian Geerken - 2001-02-27 16:32 Hi! On Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 06:00:28PM +0100, Sebastian Geerken wrote: > [...] > I'll continue to investigate it. I've found the reason and I'm thinking about how to solve it best. A few details: When a widget within the page changes its size, this will (in an idle function) result in a call of a_Dw_widget_size_request for the page widget, and then a_Dw_widget_size_allocate, with the requisition becoming a part of the allocation. The latter checks whether the allocation has changed, and this is not always the case in the test page, since a few images cause the page to have its final size. So, the condition, when a_Dw_widget_size_allocate can omit sending the "size_allocate" signal, can be wrong in some cases. Sebastian PS: Jorge, what is the matter with your ematic account? I got a failure notice mail, saying: "550 Command RCPT User not OK". Re: [Dillo-dev]Handling of style and script elements From: Jorge Arellano Cid - 2001-02-27 12:27 On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Sam Dennis wrote: > > + DILLO_HTML_PARSE_MODE_STYLE, > > Do we really need two functionally identical parsing modes? Why not just use > DILLO_HTML_PARSE_MODE_SCRIPT? I agree, and with a short comment that states what _SCRIPT parsing mode is being used to. Jorge.- Re: [Dillo-dev]Handling of style and script elements From: Sebastian Geerken - 2001-02-27 11:06 On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 12:24:21AM +0000, Sam Dennis wrote: > On Sun, Feb 25, 2001 at 08:55:50PM +0000, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > > diff -ur ./dillo-old/src/html.c ./dillo/src/html.c > > ... > > + /* spec suggests STYLE is only valid inside HEAD */ > > + if (html->InTag != DILLO_HTML_IN_HEAD) > > + return; > > The style tag may only be valid inside head, but that doesn't mean that we > shouldn't catch it elsewhere, especially as we're just ignoring the content > for now. > > > + DILLO_HTML_PARSE_MODE_STYLE, > > Do we really need two functionally identical parsing modes? Why not just use > DILLO_HTML_PARSE_MODE_SCRIPT? And call it DILLO_HTML_PARSE_MODE_IGNORE? The CSS parser will probably read the text from the stash, and in future, we will anyway need to ignore parts of the doc (e.g.