Closed
Bug 726951
Opened 12 years ago
Closed 12 years ago
<canvas> clip with shadowBlur, has vertical offset
Categories
(Core :: Graphics: Canvas2D, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla13
People
(Reporter: davidberneda, Assigned: bas.schouten)
References
Details
(Keywords: regression)
Attachments
(3 files)
1010 bytes,
text/html
|
Details | |
2.76 KB,
patch
|
jrmuizel
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
2.10 KB,
patch
|
jrmuizel
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64) AppleWebKit/535.7 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/16.0.912.77 Safari/535.7 Steps to reproduce: Applying a rectangular clip, then drawing content with shadowblur over the clipped rectangle. See attachment, click the "Clip" checkbox. Actual results: The clipped rectangle seems to be vertically offset by a value aprox twice the shadowOffsetY. Expected results: Clipped rectangle should respect shadow parameters. When no shadow is applied, clipping works fine.
Updated•12 years ago
|
Attachment #596954 -
Attachment mime type: text/plain → text/html
Comment 1•12 years ago
|
||
Confirmed on http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/60edf587f4af Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:13.0a1) Gecko/20120214 Firefox/13.0a1 ID:20120214031227 This does not happens on ubuntu http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/60edf587f4af Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:13.0a1) Gecko/20120214 Firefox/13.0a1 ID:20120214031227 Regression window(cached m-c) Works: http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/2b9a669880df Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:8.0a1) Gecko/20110713 Firefox/8.0a1 ID:20110713140256 Fails: http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/4162bda16a6a Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:8.0a1) Gecko/20110713 Firefox/8.0a1 ID:20110713142700 Pushlog: http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/pushloghtml?fromchange=2b9a669880df&tochange=4162bda16a6a Regression window(cached m-i) Works: http://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/0f18324ce229 Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:8.0a1) Gecko/20110712 Firefox/8.0a1 ID:20110712150650 Fails: http://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/e703f4342489 Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:8.0a1) Gecko/20110713 Firefox/8.0a1 ID:20110713010015 Pushlog: http://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/pushloghtml?fromchange=0f18324ce229&tochange=e703f43 42489 Suspected: Bug 666452
Updated•12 years ago
|
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
Assignee | ||
Updated•12 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → bas.schouten
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•12 years ago
|
||
Attachment #597066 -
Flags: review?(jmuizelaar)
Assignee | ||
Updated•12 years ago
|
tracking-firefox10:
--- → ?
tracking-firefox11:
--- → ?
Comment 3•12 years ago
|
||
Reftest please
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•12 years ago
|
||
Attachment #597282 -
Flags: review?(jmuizelaar)
Updated•12 years ago
|
Attachment #597066 -
Flags: review?(jmuizelaar) → review+
Comment 5•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 597282 [details] [diff] [review] Test for shadow clips working correctly on non-rectangular canvases A better test name like 726951-shadow-clips.html would be nice
Attachment #597282 -
Flags: review?(jmuizelaar) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•12 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/274121fbd839 https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/161ce815ab79
Comment 7•12 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/274121fbd839 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/161ce815ab79
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla13
Comment 8•12 years ago
|
||
This is a regression from FF8 (according to comment#1), and we have zero dupes, so I don't think this needs to be tracked for FF10 and up. Please nominate for Aurora/Beta approval if you disagree and feel there's ample reason to uplift.
Assignee | ||
Comment 9•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Alex Keybl [:akeybl] from comment #8) > This is a regression from FF8 (according to comment#1), and we have zero > dupes, so I don't think this needs to be tracked for FF10 and up. Please > nominate for Aurora/Beta approval if you disagree and feel there's ample > reason to uplift. I don't really mind either way, the only reason to uplift this might be that it's -extremely- low-risk.
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•