I’m not sure exactly what change you are proposing, but UIBase used to set
position=relative on all positioners. We took that away so that the "flex" and
other display/layout styles would not have to deal with the excess clutter and
overhead of having set position on so many elements in the DOM. Via PAYG, only
the elements that need to have a style.position should have it set.
My 2 cents,
-Alex
On 6/4/18, 8:44 AM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
It just occurred to me that the problem is due to the default position
being static.
I just added position: relative; to the .Application css and that resolved
the issue as well.
I wonder if we could completely do away with the offsetParent logic in
UIBase if we make the default position: relative. That would have a major
positive impact on performance.
Thoughts?
Harbs
> On Jun 4, 2018, at 6:36 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote:
>
> Hi Yishay,
>
> IMO, the new fix is better. And you took the right approach by examining
the code flow in the debugger. When layout fails for what appears to be a
timing issue (in this case, offsetParent not set), we definitely want to take
the time to carefully analyze why there is a timing issue instead of apply code
to work around the current lifecycle.
>
> I'm not sure we can recommend a general pattern for layouts. I think
there is some PAYG involved. It could be that in some cases the View should be
responsible for setting style.position. Then the layouts don't have to spend
the time verifying style.position. In other cases the layouts could be used in
places where other potential layouts don't rely on style.position being a
particular value. I think BasicLayout for Containers is an example.
>
> The code you used could be put into a utility function for layouts to use
to guarantee that x,y will work as expected.
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
> On 6/4/18, 8:22 AM, "yishayw" <yishayj...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Looking at it some more it has nothing to do with data binding. I
pushed a
> different fix (799f1878250d8c69347f08442c2c333740efdb8d) that changes
the
> layout itself. Here it's assumed the offsetParent is explicitly set
before
> children's x and y are set. Should this be a general pattern?
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from:
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cb3fbf0fe3aef48f404ce08d5ca2f0006%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636637225574936981&sdata=tQL6czkhz6TGNfiVuLzM8BpNPd%2BudGur3FGTGyZUJew%3D&reserved=0
>
>
