Closed
Bug 382199
Opened 18 years ago
Closed 18 years ago
"ASSERTION: Disagreement about whether it's a block or not" with table-as-root, float, absolute
Categories
(Core :: Layout, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: jruderman, Assigned: bzbarsky)
References
Details
(Keywords: assertion, testcase)
Attachments
(2 files, 1 obsolete file)
|
224 bytes,
text/html
|
Details | |
|
1.48 KB,
patch
|
dbaron
:
review+
dbaron
:
superreview+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
The testcase triggers two assertions on Mac trunk:
###!!! ASSERTION: wrong kind of child frame: 'aIsBlock == f->GetStyleDisplay()->IsBlockLevel()', file /Users/jruderman/trunk/mozilla/layout/generic/nsLineBox.cpp, line 71
###!!! ASSERTION: Disagreement about whether it's a block or not: 'fromLine->IsBlock() == fromLine->mFirstChild->GetStyleDisplay()->IsBlockLevel()', file /Users/jruderman/trunk/mozilla/layout/generic/nsBlockFrame.cpp, line 2278
Also, the red "absolute" block has mysterious space on the right side, as if it's trying to make room for the "float" block.
| Assignee | ||
Comment 1•18 years ago
|
||
I'm not sure those assertions are valid, given the code in nsLineLayout::TreatFrameAsBlock that claims that positioned/floated stuff is not a block... Because for a table root we don't have the right containing blocks around, frames that have positioned or floated style can end up in-flow.
Now I don't know _why_ those clauses are there in TreatFrameAsBlock. dbaron, roc, any idea?
Presumably the intent was that nsBlockFrame::AddFrames doesn't put placeholder frames on a block line... but that's not necessary since placeholders shouldn't have these styles. This code dates back to the dawn of time so we can probably just remove it.
| Assignee | ||
Comment 3•18 years ago
|
||
Assignee: nobody → bzbarsky
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Attachment #267931 -
Flags: superreview?(dbaron)
Attachment #267931 -
Flags: review?(dbaron)
| Assignee | ||
Comment 4•18 years ago
|
||
It looks like most of this landed as part of the patch for bug 383551. I'd still like to land the assert, I think.
| Assignee | ||
Comment 5•18 years ago
|
||
Attachment #267931 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #270366 -
Flags: review?(dbaron)
Attachment #267931 -
Flags: superreview?(dbaron)
Attachment #267931 -
Flags: review?(dbaron)
Comment on attachment 270366 [details] [diff] [review]
Just the assert
r+sr=dbaron. Sorry for the delay.
Attachment #270366 -
Flags: superreview+
Attachment #270366 -
Flags: review?(dbaron)
Attachment #270366 -
Flags: review+
| Assignee | ||
Comment 7•18 years ago
|
||
Checked in the assertion.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 18 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•