See upcoming testcase, it gives this assertion on load in a recent debug Firefox build: ###!!! ASSERTION: next-in-flow has different content: '!kidFrame || parentFrame- >GetContent() == aParentContent', file c:/mozilla/mozilla/layout/base/nsCSSFrame Constructor.cpp, line 11092
Summary: SSERTION: next-in-flow has different content: '!kidFrame || parentFrame->GetContent() == aParentContent' → ASSERTION: next-in-flow has different content: '!kidFrame || parentFrame->GetContent() == aParentContent'
Assignee: nobody → mats.palmgren
OS: Windows XP → All
Hardware: PC → All
Created attachment 207915 [details] Frame dump (first testcase) http://webtools.mozilla.org/bonsai/cvsblame.cgi?file=mozilla/layout/base/nsCSSFrameConstructor.cpp&rev=1.1172&root=/cvsroot&mark=11092-11096,11100,11104-11107,11110#11061 We're looking for content (cyan) in a descendent of aParentFrame (red). Starting at the "hint frame" (blue) [line 11092] (since it's an out-of-flow we change it to the placeholder ), the placeholder has no next sibling  so we try to find a next-in-flow/special-sibling for the parent  so we can continue with that frame's first child . This seems reasonble, the problem is that we are using the original hint frame, an out-of-flow in this case, whos parent (yellow) in this case happens to have a special sibling (lime)... It's content is different from |aParentFrame| (pink) hence the assert. I think the correct algorithm would be to look at the parent of the placeholder and see if that has any next-in-flow/special-sibling and continue with its first child if any. That is the next in-flow child that follows after the hint.
Created attachment 207917 [details] [diff] [review] Patch rev. 1 roc, I saw your name in this method, maybe you can review? The patch uses the parent of the placeholder, not the out-of-flow.
Comment on attachment 207917 [details] [diff] [review] Patch rev. 1 I think this makes sense... we really need to think about making this whole setup simpler. :(
Attachment #207917 - Flags: superreview?(bzbarsky) → superreview+
Attachment #207917 - Flags: review?(roc) → review+
Checked in on trunk at 2006-01-15 15:44 PDT. -> FIXED
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 13 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.