Brian Ryner (not reading) Assignee
	Description • 23 years ago

Steps to reproduce:

1. Enable XBL form controls (Preferences -> Debug)

2. Go to http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/query.cgi and do a query that will give a
list of bugs.

3. Click the "Change several bugs at once" link at the bottom of the page.

Result:

The table has become several thousand pixels wide, leaving a large empty area
between the ID and Severity columns.

This is a blocker for turning on XBL checkboxes.

	Bernd
	Comment 1 • 23 years ago

bryner: could you attach a less complicated testcase? ;-), where is the
maxelementsize  for the XBL checkboxes computed?

	Amarendra Hanumanula
	Comment 2 • 23 years ago

 Using XBL- based form controls are still in construction. That might be reason 
for this error. I cant find the link "Change several bugs at once" at the 
bottom of the query list page.

	Kevin McCluskey (gone)
	Comment 3 • 23 years ago

Marking nsbeta1+

	Brian Ryner (not reading) Assignee
	Comment 4 • 23 years ago

This is a fairly reduced testcase for the problem.  For the problem to appear,
it seems to be necessary to have two rows in the table, both of which contain a
checkbox.

	karnaze (gone)
	Comment 5 • 23 years ago

I'm not seeing the problem with a 2/11/2 build; the checkboxes looked fine. Have 
xbl form controls changed that much in a day or am I doing something wrong.

	Bernd
	Comment 6 • 23 years ago

a correct initial reflow without xbl form controls

area 00E49298 r=1 a=9180,UC c=9180,UC cnt=899 
 block 00E49580 r=1 a=9180,UC c=8940,UC cnt=900 
  text 00E4980C r=0 a=8940,UC c=UC,UC cnt=901 
  text 00E4980C d=0,0 
  tblO 00E499DC r=0 a=8940,UC c=0,0 cnt=902 
   tbl 00E5A37C r=0 a=8940,UC c=UC,UC cnt=903 
    rowG 00E5A51C r=0 a=UC,UC c=UC,UC cnt=904 
     row 00E5A680 r=0 a=UC,UC c=UC,UC cnt=905 
      cell 00E5A7F4 r=0 a=UC,UC c=UC,UC cnt=906 
       block 00E5A854 r=0 a=UC,UC c=UC,UC cnt=907 
        CheckboxControl(input)(0) 00E5AB3C r=0 a=UC,UC c=135,135 cnt=908 
        CheckboxControl(input)(0) 00E5AB3C d=195,195 me=195 
        text 00E5AC88 r=0 a=UC,UC c=UC,UC cnt=909 
        text 00E5AC88 d=600,285 me=600 
       block 00E5A854 d=900,285 me=600 
      cell 00E5A7F4 d=930,315 me=630 

the bad reflow with xbl

area 02ED4154 r=1 a=15225,UC c=15225,UC cnt=653 
 block 02ED443C r=1 a=15225,UC c=14985,UC cnt=654 
  text 02ED46A8 r=0 a=14985,UC c=UC,UC cnt=655 
  text 02ED46A8 d=0,0 
  tblO 02ED4878 r=0 a=14985,UC c=0,0 cnt=656 
   tbl 02ED4A48 r=0 a=14985,UC c=UC,UC cnt=657 
    rowG 02ECC2B4 r=0 a=UC,UC c=UC,UC cnt=658 
     row 02ED4D1C r=0 a=UC,UC c=UC,UC cnt=659 
      cell 02ED4E90 r=0 a=UC,UC c=UC,UC cnt=660 
       block 02ED4EF0 r=0 a=UC,UC c=UC,UC cnt=661 
        inline 02ED521C r=0 a=UC,UC c=UC,UC cnt=662 
        inline 02ED521C d=60,300 me=0 
        text 02ED5288 r=0 a=UC,UC c=UC,UC cnt=663 
        text 02ED5288 d=600,285 me=600 
       block 02ED4EF0 d=765,285 me=600 
      cell 02ED4E90 d=795,315 me=630 

problems: 
 1. the inline as a replacement for the checkbox is to small 60twips instead of 195
 2. the reported maxElementsize is 0 -> tables could squeeze it down to zero.

This is not a table problem. If the xbl form element will report correct sizes
as the non-xbl counterpart the reflow will work as expected.
I have no idea how one should debug the xbl elements, till yesterday they even
did not work in viewer.

	karnaze (gone)
	Comment 7 • 23 years ago

Thanks Bernd, --> XBL, CCing attinasi.

	Brian Ryner (not reading) Assignee
	Comment 8 • 23 years ago

Actually, this is a XUL box bug.

	Brian Ryner (not reading) Assignee
	Comment 9 • 23 years ago

taking, i have a fix

	Brian Ryner (not reading) Assignee
	Comment 10 • 23 years ago

Ok, here's what the problem was.  nsLeafBoxFrame::Reflow was not setting
maxElementSize during the reflow.  In a debug build, we check this against a
bogus 0xdeadbeef starting value and clear it to 0 if it's not set, so this
problem only shows up in non-debug builds.

Anyway, nsLeafBoxFrame::Reflow should work exactly like nsBoxFrame::Reflow,
except that they can't share the implementation due to the
LeafFrame/ContainerFrame class structure.  What I did was synced up
nsLeafBoxFrame's version with the current nsBoxFrame version, which does the
right thing. I added the slight optimization of not checking NS_STATE_IS_ROOT.

	jag (Peter Annema)
	Comment 11 • 23 years ago

Comment on attachment 69345 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

r=jag with the comments added we discussed.

	Brian Ryner (not reading) Assignee
	Comment 12 • 23 years ago

checked in