When the St theme is changed, the StThemeContext unrefs all the theme
nodes cached in it's internal hash table, then emits a signal to
notify all theme nodes that the current theme has changed.
The problem is that the first StWidget to catch a theme changed signal
will trigger a "style-changed" signal catched by its children first.
So the theme changed signal can't be processed properly to cleanup
StThemeNodePaintState before recomputing the theme.
This patch adds a weak ref to the StThemeNode in the
StThemeNodePaintState to ensure paint states are properly cleaned up
when the associated StThemeNode is freed.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=703859
Commit 318283fc70 optimized box-shadow rendering by not recreating
shadow materials on every allocation change. Other handles cannot
be reused and are updated regularly, however the patch missed the
cached corner materials - while those can be reused, we still need
to ensure that the currently used paint state references them.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=703909
Currently the box-shadow is rendering is done like this :
The first time we want to render a node that requires a box-shadow, St
creates an cogl offscreen surface of the size of the allocation and
renders the box into this offscreen buffer using modulation on the
alpha channel, this buffer is then blurred according to the CSS
parameters.
The problem with this method is that every time an StWidget is
resized, its box-shadow offscreen buffer has to be resized and
therefore rendered and blurred.
This patches propose an optimization for this use case by rendering
the box-shadow only once but at a size that is independent of the
StWidget's size. Then every time we need to paint this box-shadow, we
just render this offscreen buffer using a 9-slices.
This method only works when the allocation of the widget is bigger
than the minimum shadow size on which we can apply a 9-slices, that is
given my the radius of the corners. If the allocation is smaller than
this minimum size, we then fallback to the fully render/blur the
shadow (like before this patch).
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=689858
In most cases, we'll transition between two states on hover / focus.
Instead of recalculating and repainting our resources on state change,
simply cache the last state when we transition.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=697274
The background image, background image shadow and border image are
allocation-indepedent, so we can keep these in the node. Given that these are
are likely cached in the StTextureCache, the slight increase in code complexity
may not be worth caching these textures and materials -- we might be better off
just computing when we need to paint.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=697274
This ensures that two widgets sharing the same theme node won't trample
on each other's prerendered materials if the actors are of different
sizes. This also tries to be very careful to share as much as possible
during a transition.
This has the side effect that if a widget changes state a bunch of times,
we won't cache every state. Since we expect that state changes are
infrequent and that most cases we'll be able to use the texture cache
to do most of the heavy lifting, this cost is much more insignificant
than rendering a number of different actors with the same theme node
and different sizes.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=697274
Since we now share theme nodes between, we shouldn't cache the paint state
across all nodes. As a first step towards putting this in the actor, split
out the state into another structure. Keep it in the theme node for now
so that we don't make too many changes in one commit.
It's possible that some of these pieces of drawing state could be shared
between theme nodes. For the sake of simplicity, assume that none of them
are shared or should be shared. A future commit could identify those that
could be shared and move them back into the theme node.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=697274
We want to put the paint state in the actor rather than in the theme
node, as having two actors with different sizes but the same theme node
is now much less efficient.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=697274
If you copy a theme node's paint state into itself, it should be an
inexpensive no-op. What actually happened was that we destroyed the
old paint state, re-initialized to blank, then copied the blank state
back into itself. In the process, we lost (for instance) the textures
for rounded corners.
Until I introduced the texture cache, this never actually happened,
because when st_widget_recompute_style() calls st_widget_get_theme_node(),
we'd always get a fresh theme node. Now, we get a theme node T back
from the cache, notice that paint_equal(T, T) is true, short-circuit
slightly by copying its drawing state into itself, and destroy drawing
state that we still needed.
I'm going to fix this in recompute_style() too, but as a general
principle, self-assignment ought to be harmless.
Bug: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=687465
Reviewed-by: Jasper St. Pierre <jstpierre@mecheye.net>
StThemeNode caches its resources aggressively to keep the required
work on paint to a minimum - right now, resources are only recreated
on allocation changes.
In order to update the background-image property correctly when the
underlying file changes, resources need to be recreated without a
size change, so add an explicit method for that.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=679268
Add support for the CSS "background-repeat" property. Currently, this
only supports on/off, rather than allowing tiling in each individual
dimension. It is supported for both the cogl and cairo rendering paths.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=680801
This swaps a use of GLfloat for a regular float. Cogl might stop
including a GL header in its public headers soon so this would fix a
compilation error.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=672711
Since our implementation of background-size is now CSS-compliant, we
do not need this subtexture hack that clips a "leak". The comment here
is also incorrect.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=633462
It seems that accidentally, two variables were swapped in one code path
of the background-size implementation, causing interesting but wrong
images for some elements.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=633462
A new texture has undefined contents - when we're creating a shadow,
we need to clear the contents of the texture before drawing the border
and background into it.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=668048
Implement the background-size CSS property, specified by the CSS
Backgrounds and Borders Module Level 3, including the keywords
"contain", "cover", and fixed-size backgrounds.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=633462
If we add a 0-sized actor with a border-radius, we will crash as we try to
allocate a 0-sized texture in Cogl. Bail out early instead of doing that.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=661617
The translate coordinates are calculated as the offset after the scale, so it
needs to be applied after the scale as well. This fixes random centering issues
in the UI.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=660674
Clutter 1.7.x introduced CLUTTER_CAIRO_FORMAT_ARGB32: which can be used when
sharing textures/data with cairo without having to do check the
byte order and choose the appropriate format by hand.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=654577
The cogl path pads the corners out to the maximum corner radius to make the
math and painting logic easier. Unfortunately, when the radius exceeds the
actor's halfsize, the padding ends up interfering with other corners, creating
a big mess of rendering errors.
It'd be extremely complicated to fix this properly in the Cogl code,
so take the Cairo fallback.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=649513
Currently, any cases of overlapping corners were just ignored and rendered incorrectly.
Implement the corner overlap algorithm as specified by the W3C to fix this.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=649513
If we aren't going to fill the content area of the node with a solid
background color, then we need to clear it of any artifacts left over
from drawing the border.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=640465
This reverts commit b4ec342d06.
The alpha > 0 checks should actually be alpha < 255 for the commit to
make sense as designed. The design isn't right either, though,
since we need to preserve the translucency in translucent gradients,
not block it with a solid color fill.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=640465
If a background gradient isn't fully opaque, then we need to first
fill in the background color so the border color doesn't leak into
the interior.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=640465
We need to be careful to ignore any preexisting color information
in the interior of the node when filling it with the background color,
since the border color may have leaked into the interior and the
background color may be translucent.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=640465
The material of prerendered backgrounds is now painted in the
rectangle determined by st_theme_node_get_paint_box(). As the
ClutterActorBox returned from that function includes the space
needed to draw the box shadow, the background ends up occluding
the shadow.
As the box shadow is not part of the background, factor out a new
helper function which excludes the box shadow, and use it to
prerender and place the background material.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=641522
Previously, trying to use a background image and border on
the same node resulted in the background drawing over the border.
This commit adds support for background images to
st_theme_node_render_background_with_border
and changes the code to call that function when appropriate.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=636976
A lot of the border drawing logic in st_theme_node_render_gradient is
applicable to other non-solid background types than gradients.
This commit refactors that code so that support for other non-solid
background types can be more easily integrated later.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=636976
When drawing the background image shadow, we need to clip it
to the node's background color, gradient, or borders if present.
If the background color is transparent, and there aren't any
borders, then we don't clip the shadow since there is nothing
to confine it.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=636976
The border_texture (and border_material) variable is being
overloaded for two purposes: it's used as a source
to 9-slice the border from, and it's used as place to prerender
the background and border together for gradients.
While we only do one or the other for any given node, the two cases
are distinct, and should use distinct variables for readability.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=636976
Currently, "-st-shadow" can mean one of three very
different things:
1) shadow based on alpha of the background image
2) shadow the "border box" of the node
3) shadow applied to the content of a StIcon
It isn't well defined which of the above 3 cases
-st-shadow will mean for any given node, however.
This commit splits the property into three
different properties, "box-shadow",
"-st-background-image-shadow", and "icon-shadow"
to make it all very explicit.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=636976
While non-uniform border widths were parsed correctly, an arbitrary
side's width was picked when painting, so that each border ended up
with the same width and the widths specified in CSS were ignored.
At least for sides between non-rounded corners, using a different
border width can be reasonable, for instance at screen edges.
Different border widths around rounded corners are kind of crack,
but then it would be lame not to support it ...
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=607500
For gradient backgrounds, borders were implemented by filling the
background shape with the border color first, and then scaling down
the path to draw the background.
The result is not correct[0], which is especially visible if the border
width is greater than the border radius - so instead of scaling down
the original path, use a separate path for the background.
The result is consistent with the borders we draw for non-gradient
backgrounds, and much closer to the correct standard behavior.
[0] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-background/#the-border-radiushttps://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=607500
