'I don’t think we’ve dealt with a lot of children changing sizes (other than Images loading late and a few other things) so it may be time to listen to widthChanged/heightChanged/sizeChanged as children get added if there isn’t already code doing that.'
That would be another way of doing it. There is already this code [1] that is swf-only but seems to only be relevant before sawInitComplete. But if the children run their layouts when their own size changes, then they can notify their parent as well if the size changed either before or during layout. That's sort of what I was trying to do with the ContainerView change I mentioned earlier. It checks size for change in beforeLayout and again in afterLayout and then requests parent layout if it thinks the parent needs to do something that could affect parent layout or even re-apply its own rules to the current target. In this way there is not a need to add listeners to every child. But I expect there are some downsides or things I cannot see with what I did so far because I have not spent a lot of time in this code, as you have. I'll post more details in the github issue at my EOD. 1. https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/blob/9c70b052a6fef3ebe7c6a07ca887af4f7381d46f/frameworks/projects/Core/src/main/royale/org/apache/royale/core/LayoutBase.as#L131 On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 3:32 AM Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid> wrote: > Serkan, is there a bug tracking your layout issue? > > There should be a difference between first layout if all children have > known sizes and what Greg is describing which is responding to children > changing sizes. I don’t think we’ve dealt with a lot of children changing > sizes (other than Images loading late and a few other things) so it may be > time to listen to widthChanged/heightChanged/sizeChanged as children get > added if there isn’t already code doing that. > > There might be other issues with containers having an inner contentArea > that might be getting in the way too. > > HTH, > -Alex > > From: Yishay Weiss <yishayj...@hotmail.com> > Reply-To: "dev@royale.apache.org" <dev@royale.apache.org> > Date: Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 4:30 AM > To: "dev@royale.apache.org" <dev@royale.apache.org> > Subject: RE: MXRoyale layout issues - questions/discussion > > Call me lazy but this is a bit difficult to parse. If you can spare some > time, maybe come up with a GitHub issue that describes a concrete case so > we can discuss this. > > > I think the layouts work downward for this, but changes in the children > don't seem to trigger the parent layout. > > Yes, I’ve seen that as well. Alex’s advice when I pointed it out to him > was to just add a parent.dispatchEvent(new Event(‘layoutNeeded’)) if it > solves a concrete bug. It’s true that this could result in a performance > hit. If that’s your issue then I guess we can discuss emulation of the > layout manager or some other optimization. > > > From: Greg Dove <greg.d...@gmail.com> > Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 11:12:08 AM > To: Apache Royale Development <dev@royale.apache.org> > Subject: MXRoyale layout issues - questions/discussion > > Hi, > > Just wondered if anyone else is dealing with layout issues in Flex > emulation. I have some layout issues that are slowing my progress on a > project, and I'd like to resolve them as quickly as I can. > > In particular, I see issues with BoxLayout-based containers which have > percentWidth or percentHeight set. These don't get determined as having > width or height 'SizedToContent' when performing layout, but in many > situations they behave in a similar way (they can change their size based > on their content in terms of layout rules applied by the parent container). > This is because in Flex, percentages are not simply a percentage of their > parent, but they follow something perhaps a little closer to flexbox layout > rules for all the percentWidth or percentHeight siblings (managed by their > parent's layout). In other words, they are also related to the measured > size of their content if the parent needs to manage them (I'm not sure how > best to describe this, but I think that sort of captures it). They can > expand beyond their percent allocation or contract below it depending on > their measured sizes. > I think the layouts work downward for this, but changes in the children > don't seem to trigger the parent layout. > > An example might be > <mx:HBox id='addThingsToMe' width='50%' /> > > If you have the above at the application level (where the application has > vertical layout) and keep adding buttons (for example) to the HBox via a UI > test button that adds a new Button to that on each click, then it should > expand horizontally greater than 50% width when the volume of buttons > exceeds its nominal 50% width. It is definitely easier to see this if you > add a border to the container. > > I have been working on this, and made progress, but the approach I am using > feels a bit patchwork, and just wondered whether others are seeing anything > like this, and/or how it has been addressed elsewhere.... > > Here's a summary of some of the things I have been trying, which do yield > improvements, but don't really solve the problem completely: > > 1. added extra listener for 'childrenRemoved' in BoxLayout strand setter. > > 2. Created a new mx 'ContainerView' class > (mx.containers.beads.ContainerView extends > org.apache.royale.html.beads.ContainerView) > This has the following in it: > > private var widthBefore:Number = -1 > private var heightBefore:Number = -1; > private var sizeChangedBeforeLayout:Boolean; > > COMPILE::JS > override public function beforeLayout():Boolean > { > var container:Container = host as Container; > > sizeChangedBeforeLayout = (widthBefore != container.width || heightBefore > != container.height); > widthBefore = container.width; > heightBefore = container.height; > return super.beforeLayout(); > } > > COMPILE::JS > override public function afterLayout():void > { > var container:Container = host as Container; > //size might change during layout > var sizeChangedDuringLayout:Boolean = !sizeChangedBeforeLayout && > (widthBefore != container.width || heightBefore != container.height); > if (sizeChangedDuringLayout) { > //prepare for next time > widthBefore = container.width; > heightBefore = container.height; > } > var requestParentLayout:Boolean = sizeChangedBeforeLayout > || sizeChangedDuringLayout > || (!isNaN(container.percentWidth) && container.width < > container.measuredWidth) || (!isNaN(container.percentHeight) && > container.height < container.measuredHeight); > if (requestParentLayout && container.parent is Container) { > trace('requesting parent layout of ',(container as > Object).ROYALE_CLASS_INFO.names[0].qName ); > (container.parent as Container).layoutNeeded(); > } > } > > That is pretty much it, and it is being used as a replacement in my local > MXRoyale css for Container: > > /*IBeadView: > ClassReference("org.apache.royale.html.beads.ContainerView");*/ > IBeadView: ClassReference("mx.containers.beads.ContainerView"); > > I'm not saying this is right, but it does help quite a bit with what I am > facing. > > In addition to BoxLayout in general, I have been working on the > Grid/GridRow/GridItem layouts which are more specific in terms of layout > changes needed, but also can have similar problems. > > > Although I am seeing improvements with what I have done so far, I'm not > really satisfied with it, and I am keen for input/discussion (or > collaboration). I have been pursuing what I would mostly describe as a > 'workaround' approach, so would welcome any thoughts on how best to tackle > this. > I think there is something missing because of the way Flex does layouts vs. > the way Royale does it, but I can't describe it fully yet. Perhaps things > are only currently envisaged to work with mxml declarative content onto > display and not so much with dynamic updates. But I think state-based > changes could have similar effects for some of these things if they happen > inside containers that have their own percent dimensions. > > > Thanks, > Greg > From: Greg Dove<mailto:greg.d...@gmail.com> > Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 11:12 AM > To: Apache Royale Development<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org> > Subject: MXRoyale layout issues - questions/discussion > > Hi, > > Just wondered if anyone else is dealing with layout issues in Flex > emulation. I have some layout issues that are slowing my progress on a > project, and I'd like to resolve them as quickly as I can. > > In particular, I see issues with BoxLayout-based containers which have > percentWidth or percentHeight set. These don't get determined as having > width or height 'SizedToContent' when performing layout, but in many > situations they behave in a similar way (they can change their size based > on their content in terms of layout rules applied by the parent container). > This is because in Flex, percentages are not simply a percentage of their > parent, but they follow something perhaps a little closer to flexbox layout > rules for all the percentWidth or percentHeight siblings (managed by their > parent's layout). In other words, they are also related to the measured > size of their content if the parent needs to manage them (I'm not sure how > best to describe this, but I think that sort of captures it). They can > expand beyond their percent allocation or contract below it depending on > their measured sizes. > I think the layouts work downward for this, but changes in the children > don't seem to trigger the parent layout. > > An example might be > <mx:HBox id='addThingsToMe' width='50%' /> > > If you have the above at the application level (where the application has > vertical layout) and keep adding buttons (for example) to the HBox via a UI > test button that adds a new Button to that on each click, then it should > expand horizontally greater than 50% width when the volume of buttons > exceeds its nominal 50% width. It is definitely easier to see this if you > add a border to the container. > > I have been working on this, and made progress, but the approach I am using > feels a bit patchwork, and just wondered whether others are seeing anything > like this, and/or how it has been addressed elsewhere.... > > Here's a summary of some of the things I have been trying, which do yield > improvements, but don't really solve the problem completely: > > 1. added extra listener for 'childrenRemoved' in BoxLayout strand setter. > > 2. Created a new mx 'ContainerView' class > (mx.containers.beads.ContainerView extends > org.apache.royale.html.beads.ContainerView) > This has the following in it: > > private var widthBefore:Number = -1 > private var heightBefore:Number = -1; > private var sizeChangedBeforeLayout:Boolean; > > COMPILE::JS > override public function beforeLayout():Boolean > { > var container:Container = host as Container; > > sizeChangedBeforeLayout = (widthBefore != container.width || heightBefore > != container.height); > widthBefore = container.width; > heightBefore = container.height; > return super.beforeLayout(); > } > > COMPILE::JS > override public function afterLayout():void > { > var container:Container = host as Container; > //size might change during layout > var sizeChangedDuringLayout:Boolean = !sizeChangedBeforeLayout && > (widthBefore != container.width || heightBefore != container.height); > if (sizeChangedDuringLayout) { > //prepare for next time > widthBefore = container.width; > heightBefore = container.height; > } > var requestParentLayout:Boolean = sizeChangedBeforeLayout > || sizeChangedDuringLayout > || (!isNaN(container.percentWidth) && container.width < > container.measuredWidth) || (!isNaN(container.percentHeight) && > container.height < container.measuredHeight); > if (requestParentLayout && container.parent is Container) { > trace('requesting parent layout of ',(container as > Object).ROYALE_CLASS_INFO.names[0].qName ); > (container.parent as Container).layoutNeeded(); > } > } > > That is pretty much it, and it is being used as a replacement in my local > MXRoyale css for Container: > > /*IBeadView: > ClassReference("org.apache.royale.html.beads.ContainerView");*/ > IBeadView: ClassReference("mx.containers.beads.ContainerView"); > > I'm not saying this is right, but it does help quite a bit with what I am > facing. > > In addition to BoxLayout in general, I have been working on the > Grid/GridRow/GridItem layouts which are more specific in terms of layout > changes needed, but also can have similar problems. > > > Although I am seeing improvements with what I have done so far, I'm not > really satisfied with it, and I am keen for input/discussion (or > collaboration). I have been pursuing what I would mostly describe as a > 'workaround' approach, so would welcome any thoughts on how best to tackle > this. > I think there is something missing because of the way Flex does layouts vs. > the way Royale does it, but I can't describe it fully yet. Perhaps things > are only currently envisaged to work with mxml declarative content onto > display and not so much with dynamic updates. But I think state-based > changes could have similar effects for some of these things if they happen > inside containers that have their own percent dimensions. > > > Thanks, > Greg > >
