`UiScalar` was `Len` without the `leftover` weight, which is the separation
canonical `main` already had as `Len` beside `LayoutLen` and this branch
collapsed. It is needed back for the queued clamp: a cap may not contain a
share, because a cap has to read the report a rule otherwise makes moot, and
a share puts the container's division into the same equation -- two
self-consistent assignments, which is the multiple-fixed-point failure
generated seed 13 punished for orthogonal sizing. `min(report, cap)` is not
a `LayoutLen` either: it is a sum of parts, and the smaller of two of them
is not one.
So `UiScalar` is `Len`, what was `Len` is `LayoutLen`, and the two say in
their docs which is which: a `Len` is pixels plus a fraction of a box -- a
position being the length from the box's start, which is why a span is two
of them -- and a `LayoutLen` is a `Len` plus a claim only a container
dividing its room can answer. `From<Len> for LayoutLen` is the one-way step
between them.
Names only; the shader's `UiScalar` is renamed with them. Checked: fmt,
clippy, 105 tests, and `tabs`, `minimal`, `view`, `text` and `random`
byte-identical at 1920x1200.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
`.width()` built a `SetSize` whose whole job was to answer `size_hint`, so
every declared length cost a widget, an `ActiveData` and a link of chain to
say one number. It is now a `SizeRule` per axis on `WidgetData`, beside
`region_node`, resolved by `Painter` where the widget is drawn. `SetSize`
and `MaxSize` are gone; `MaxSize` had no caller but its own builders.
That settles which of two answers is the size. A rule wins on the axis it
names and the `Size` returned by `draw` answers the rest, applied once in
`draw_inner` rather than by each widget that could carry one -- so the
widget under a rule never learns of it. `Painter::size_hint` reads the rule
first for the same reason: a rule that beats what a widget would draw has
to beat what it says about itself.
`declared_lens` still falls back to a non-leftover `size_hint`, which is
how an image or a gap gets its own pixel size rather than the whole offer.
That is the offer's business rather than a declaration's, and it falls away
when a widget occupies its reported size inside the box it was offered.
`known` and `declared` are separate because a share is a length to whoever
divides one and not to whoever composes a box: `.width(leftover(3))` is
known without drawing but cannot narrow anything.
Checked: fmt, clippy, 85 tests, and 100 generated seeds agreeing warm
against cold in 67.6 s. `minimal`, `text` and `view` render byte-identical
at 1920x1200; `tabs` differs only in the widget count it prints about
itself, which is two wrapper types smaller.
`dp` is coming, and then `abs` says which of the two it is not. The
component has always been a pixel count, so the name that admits it is
the one that leaves room for a second unit beside it.
Mechanical: the field on `Len` and `UiScalar`, their constructors,
`to_abs`/`get_abs`, the matching WGSL struct member and the locals
composing it. Field order and types are unchanged, so the `Pod` layout
the shader reads is the same bytes. `f32::abs` is untouched.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Every generated case changes one thing: four declared sizes, or one
span's children, or the output. A frame settling one dependency path
says nothing about a frame settling a set of them that overlap, which
is the case the settle order exists for.
So two more: every declared size in the tree changing at once, and a
spread of widgets marked for redraw together. The second changes
nothing, which is the point -- no box may move, and the order the
dirty set is taken in is all that can make one. The hundred-seed sweep
is 1,000 comparisons now rather than 800, and passes.
`IRIS_PHASE=many` is the same load for the diagnostics rig, with
`IRIS_DIRTY` widgets marked per frame. It says what one repainting leaf
cannot: at 130 of 260 widgets, choosing which dirty widget to settle
next is 24.5% of the frame, because the dirty set is scanned once per
widget settled and a hash set is walked by capacity rather than by
length. Memoizing the depth walk inside one scan does not pay -- it
trades parent lookups for memo lookups and costs 4% more instructions --
so the fix is to stop rescanning, which changes the order widgets
settle in and wants agreeing first.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
A container measures a child by drawing it in a box it may not keep, so
one layout asks a text for a dozen widths and comes back to widths it
has already had -- the hottest text in the depth-8 tree draws 32 times.
Each ask re-ran the shaper, because the two caches in front of it held
one entry each and a trial width alternating with a final width evicts
the answer about to be wanted again. `perf record` put 63% of a resize
frame in text and 0.9% in `draw_inner`.
So keep more than one: a bounded store of shapings on `TextData`, keyed
by the text, the attrs and the width, holding the parley layout and the
glyphs placed from it. Bounding the store rather than each buffer is
what keeps it a fixed cost -- +4 MB on a tree of 4,000 texts, which is
19 MB less than the code before #16 holds after the same resizes.
`TextBuffer` now holds the glyphs of the shaping it is drawn as, which
is where `TextView::tex` was. That leaves one place to invalidate rather
than two, so the `MutDetect` flags on a view's text and attrs have no
reader and go, along with the `buf.changed = true` after every edit.
On a 40-row tree of distinct random paragraphs, 500 resize frames:
124.2M instructions per frame before, 17.7M after, and 45.9M when the
width never repeats. The five reference renders and the resize render
are byte-identical, and the 100-seed sweep passes.
`tests/revision_cost.rs` is that tree, written in the API subset
`43ce8c7` shares so the same source measures the code this replaced.
Report the worst frame and p99 beside the median, since a stutter is
what somebody sees. Count glyph placements, and count a text render per
ask rather than per shaping, so the store cannot hide how many times a
layout drew the same text.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
iris-aiandClaude Opus 5