Four rounds over the same idea: an expression that needed a comment to say
what it computed wanted to be a named operation.
The placement description is built by chaining off the value that says it.
`UiSpan::within_desc`/`shifted_desc` and `Len::as_desc` replace the
`PlaceDescAxis::` constructors, `PlaceDescAxis::axis` lifts one axis into a
pair with the whole box across it, and `PlaceDesc::per_axis` covers the case
where the two axes differ. `beside` is dropped: `from_axis` already said it.
Seven module-level functions become methods on the value each took first --
`Widgets::declared_lens`, `LayoutLen::fills`, `PlaceDesc::placement` and
`::rel_base_and_region`, `Size::within_box`, `UiRegion::at_origin` and
`::as_translation`.
`UiSpan::place` is the aligned-placement rule, which was written out three
times; `LayoutLen::without_leftover` is the sibling `apply_leftover` never
had, at six sites; `is_px` and `is_only_leftover` name field comparisons the
surrounding comments had to translate; `Holds::covers` was interval
containment spelled out by hand. A span's `shared` loses the two arguments
that did not vary across its loop.
`LayoutHolds` was four two-element arrays where every other pair here is a
struct of two per-axis values, so nothing it did could be written once.
It becomes `AxisHolds` on `x` and `y`, and `and`, `covers` and `contains`
lose their loops.
Every pair gets `Index<Axis>`/`IndexMut<Axis>` through one macro, and the
eighteen `axis`/`axis_mut` methods go. `const_index` keeps the accessors
usable in const context.
Cold layout is unchanged: `layout_dump` over 400 depth-5 trees is identical
to 58ce74d byte for byte, across all 34,492 boxes.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
`frame` named a length, not a rectangle, which was the one word in the
layout vocabulary that lied about its own shape. It is `rel_base`: what a
fraction a widget declares or reports is a fraction of.
Three API changes with it, all for containers that do one simple thing:
- `widget_within(id, region)` returns, taking a box in the widget's own
coordinates and deriving the child's rel base from it. `Offset` and `Pad`
are one call each again. `Offset` also stops reading `region_len`, which
pinned its drawing to a box length it does not care about.
- `place_at` takes the rel base, returns the answer, and asks the child
where there is no answer to re-express. Which of the two happens is the
painter's to work out, so `Span`'s second pass is one call and its
`drawn_across` bookkeeping is gone.
- `Part::All` is a `Part::WHOLE` constant rather than a variant, since it
was exactly `Of(UiSpan::FULL)` and bought a separate arm in two matches.
Measured at 0.07% of instructions retired against 0.04% run-to-run noise.
Cold layout is byte-identical to `84dad21` over 400 depth-5 trees.
The split box was named `region` and `placement` on 2026-09-17; `frame`
came back as a length and survived, `extent` did not. It stayed as the
name for both halves, distinguished only by prose: `draw_at` bound the
caller's `part` to a parameter called `extent`, and `ActiveData` held two
`UiRegion`s that `draw_at` wrote `part: extent` from.
The box a parent asks a widget in is now the region, and where its
drawing ends up is its placement. `Painter`'s four holds accumulators
become the one `LayoutHolds` they were assembled into, which also drops
the name mapping between them.
The cold dump of 400 depth-5 trees is byte-identical across the change.
The offer names are from the protocol before this one, where a widget was
drawn twice and the record had to say which drawing was the question. It
is asked once now, so offer_part is the part it was asked in, offer_place
the place it was asked at, and place where its drawing was put: part,
asked and placed. LayoutHolds::frame is a range on the window since the
frame became a length of one, and the frame's own entry is the frame_len
pin beside it, so it is window; Painter::frame_own goes with it.
answers_at had one caller and said less than the line that replaces it.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
There is one coordinate unit, the window. Every box in the tree is a
region in window units and a widget's frame is a length in the same
units, which is only what fractions resolve against, so the box need not
be the frame and padding can take from both without either becoming the
other. A region node's entry is a translation -- a rel 1 region anchored
where its box starts -- rather than a box, so nothing composes a frame
back up a chain and a node that moves is one entry write.
Padding is then an inset of both: its pixels come off the frame, so
rel(1.0) under it fills the padded widget rather than overflowing it,
and off the box, so what is drawn sits inside. A length a container
decides for a child's frame is a length of the window like everything
else here -- a row's slot, padding's frame less its pixels, or the box a
stack's sizing child decided, which arrives as Part::Sized -- because a
slot of a row is not a fraction of anything the row can name, the same
reason a node entry is a translation. A declaration is a fraction of
whichever of those reached it, and is the only one that also places the
box.
Frame validity is a pin beside the box's, not a range: a range of window
pixels cannot say which frame an answer is a fraction of, since two
frames are different lengths at the same window size. A widget pins its
frame by reading it or by being answered with it under a fractional
rule, and the pin composes up wherever a length of this frame is what
reached the child.
Also here, because the diagnosis needed them: the shrinker reports the
shrunk tree's own divergence with each level's frame, ask, box and size
warm against cold, and there is a size-resize case -- a change and then a
resize, the order that shows an answer kept as a fraction of the wrong
length, which every other case compares at the window it was made at.
Three defects the reports found, each pinned: a rule changed over two
pads relocated the column under them instead of dividing it again (seed
59, depth 5, resize-size), a share inside padding had the padding taken
off twice, and a root resolved its own rule twice.
fmt and clippy clean with and without layout-diagnostics, 121 suite, 20
core, 11 generated, the 400-seed depth-5 shrinker over all sixteen cases.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
A widget is asked in two boxes rather than one. Its frame is what a fraction
it declares or reports is a fraction of, and it passes through a span, a
stack and a scroll unchanged, so `rel(0.5)` is half the same area however
many containers sit between: a frame is narrowed only by what is decided
above the widget -- a declared length, the root. Its extent is where the
drawing goes, given as a `Place` per axis: a part of the parent's own box,
measured in frame lengths from where that box starts, which the child either
fills or has its answer placed inside.
What that buys is that nothing under a container depends on where the
container sits. A container reads `extent_len` for the length it divides and
nothing about the start, so moving it re-places its children by re-adding
that start and draws nobody again; and a fraction is resolved once, against
the frame, rather than once per box it is composed through -- a stack sized
by a child that reports `rel(0.5)` no longer takes half of half.
`Place` replaces `DrawRegion`, `ExtentPlacement`, `widget_within`,
`measure_len`, `region()`, `placement()` and `box_of`. Primitives and masks
are written in the widget's own box's coordinates alone, so the drawing has
one reference rather than two. The placement pin goes with them: reading the
extent's length pins that length symbolically, and pins compose only where a
child's box is its parent's own.
Placing an answer waits for the end of the parent's draw or for the next ask
of that child in it, so a span child is one drawing and one move rather than
two moves.
`Pad` is transparent: its padding goes around what it pads and its child
keeps the outer frame, which is where `Outset` was going anyway. A fraction
under a pad is now a fraction of the frame rather than of the inset box.
Checked: fmt, clippy with -D warnings, 109 suite tests and 20 core tests in
debug, the 11 generated cases, and the shrinker at 400 trees of depth 5 over
all fifteen cases -- which still finds seed 108 under `reorder`, where a
wrapping text measured in one box and drawn in another settles differently
warm than cold. `redraw` therefore keeps the baseline's deferral for a box
that is not as long as the one the widget was measured in; the plan's step
6 is not done, and the next commit message or the handoff says why.
Keep the original measurement placement separate from the assigned slot.
Validate frame and extent lengths before reusing an answer or drawing, and
represent hint-only records as having no measured answer.
Retain primitive and mask coordinates with their frame/extent reference.
Forwarded children follow a reused wrapper's placement without rerunning
valid draw bodies. Keep the single Widget::draw API.
Restore the eight failing suite cases from the region/placement prototype,
with regressions for mixed coordinate references, a changed inherited
extent, the sizing-stack fraction, and an undrawn share becoming visible.
This remains experimental: nested container updates do substantially more
work than e44dea3 despite restoring the leaf and wrapper reuse guarantees.
Do not merge it as a performance improvement.
The protocol split: `region` is the box a parent gives a widget -- what a
fraction it declares or reports is a fraction of, and the coordinates
every region it writes composes within -- and it is the same box on the
ask that measures and the ask that places. `placement` is what of that
region the drawing takes, chosen by the parent per axis or by the
widget's own answer and alignment.
That is what stops a fraction being resolved twice: the placing ask no
longer hands the widget its own answer as its box, so nothing under it
re-resolves against a box that came from its own report. `reports_of`
and `decided` are gone, folded into the two regions; `box_of` is gone;
`declared_box` becomes `ask_box`, which gives a rule the region's length
and takes the position from the placement.
84 of 92 suite tests pass. Five text and region-node cases still diverge
warm against cold, and three count a second widget draw where a span's
measuring ask and its placing ask give different placements.
`rel(0.5)` is half the span whatever else is in it and wherever the child
sits among them (Bryan, 2026-09-17). It was half of what the span had left
at the point it asked, because a report came back composed through the box
it was offered and a span offers each child the room from its cursor -- so
a nested span taking half of what it was given took a quarter of a row
whose first half was already spoken for, where the same half written as a
rule on the child took half the row.
The offer stays the remainder: a text has to wrap at the width actually
there, and `a_text_in_a_span_wraps_at_the_room_left_rather_than_the_whole_row`
pins that. What separates from it is the base a report's fractions are of,
which the ask now carries. It is the box the child was given wherever that
box is the child's whole area -- a pad's inset, a stack child, a scroll's
content -- and a span passes its own extent along the row.
`widget_decided` becomes `widget_at`, which says both things about an ask
rather than one of them; `widget_within` is still the sugar for neither.
Two spans asking for half each now take the whole row between them and a
third overflows, which the rewritten
`a_span_reads_a_child_report_as_a_fraction_of_the_row` states outright.
The five reference renders are byte-identical at 1920x1200 and `random`
live-resized still matches a cold render, so nothing that exists reports a
fraction to a span today.
A widget reports a fraction of the box it was given. Span added that
fraction straight into a cursor that counts fractions of the row, and Pad
summed its padding onto it, both right only while the offer had the
parent's whole extent -- which a span's does not after a relative child.
DrawResult::size and known_len now compose the answer through the offer's
length, so a container reads lengths of its own box.
That exposed placed_box scaling a fractional answer against a box the
parent had already chosen from it, halving a nested span twice. The
near-edge alignment override becomes per-axis `decided` flags: a box the
parent chose from the answer is the answer, and is not placed again.
Span decides the row axis; Scroll and Stack's sizing child decide both.
Alignment is always the widget's own property now.
The window is no longer a move entry. Chains bottom out in MoveIdx::NONE
and the window is applied where a fraction becomes pixels, in to_px on the
CPU and by the uniform in the shader, which now snaps the summed coordinate
since a floor does not distribute over a sum. A resize rewrites no entry.
Verified: view, minimal, random, tabs and text render byte-identical at
1920x1200 against 5f16617, a live resize to 1280x800 is identical to a
cold render, and the 100-seed oracle, all fifteen shrinker cases at 400
seeds of depth 5, and 1000 seeds of depth 6 pass.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Asked of the `tabs` render: does a gap come out the same number of pixels
wherever it appears? For a length in pixels it does, and structurally rather
than by luck -- `Len::within` adds a part's own pixels rather than scaling
them, and both ends of a gap carry the same fraction, so the multiply that
rounds is the same on each and cancels. The test buries a row of five under
three containers that are each a fraction of their parent, so nothing
reaches the window without being composed and rounded, and checks every gap
and every declared width at five box widths. Swept over 2,100 widths when it
was written and exact at every one.
For a share it does not, and the second test pins by how much rather than
pretending otherwise: one or two steps between children that asked for the
same fraction, 0.001 to 0.002 px. A position is the quantity that gets
rounded so the row fills exactly and no two children leave a seam, and that
is what costs it. Exact composition would shrink the spread, not remove it:
five equal lengths cannot fill a row whose step count is not a multiple of
five.
Checked: fmt, clippy, 83 suite tests, 17 core unit tests.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
`Stack` and `Pad` forced the near edge on every child. That override exists
so a container that reports a child's size and then hands it the box derived
from that report does not place its content twice -- and it is owed only
where the box really is the child's own answer.
`Stack` gives every child the box its sizing child defines. That box is
`box_of(child.size())`, so the sizing child has no room in it and needs the
override; every other child is handed a box that owes nothing to it, and
where it sits in one bigger than itself is its own business. With the
override it could not be aligned at all.
`Pad` reports its inner's size plus the padding, so where its box is that
answer the inset box is exactly the inner and alignment has nowhere to move
it. Where the box is bigger -- a share of a row, a rule over the pad -- the
slack belongs to the inner, and the override pinned it to a corner.
The `tabs` example is the visible case both ways: its counters asked for
`Align::RIGHT` inside a stack and sat at the left, and `text`'s narrow panel
filled a row it had asked to sit at the top of. Both match canonical `main`
again. Neither was noticed when `d3b0ebf` made alignment a property, and the
handoff's claim that `tabs` then "differs only in the widget count it prints
about itself" was wrong -- it was checked at `8220a78` and not re-checked
after the next commit.
Checked: fmt, clippy, 81 suite tests, 17 core unit tests, the release oracle
at 100 seeds and at 1000 seeds of depth 6, and all fifteen shrinker cases at
400 seeds of depth 5. `tabs`, `text` and `random` change exactly where a
child now honours its own alignment; `view` and `minimal` are unchanged.
`tabs` is still not `main`'s render: `.sized((100, 100)).center().width(
leftover(2))` on one widget no longer means a square centred in a two-share
box, because one widget carries one length per axis and `.width` overwrites
what `.sized` set. That one is an API question, not a bug, and is open.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Bryan's call, 2026-09-16, taken for the cycles: a share now lands a
thousandth of a pixel short of its row instead of on it, which is less than
an even number of pixels draws.
`Fixed::mul` is a widening multiply and a shift, with the sign branch and the
half-step add gone. The two short-circuits priced against the old multiply go
with it: `UiSpan::within`'s test for a span that is the whole of its parent,
and `Fixed::scaled`'s test for nothing scaled by something, which was the
whole of `scaled` -- both cases come out of the truncating multiply unchanged,
and the bodies the comparisons cost were what kept the inliner from taking
`within` at all. `nm` is the check: `<UiSpan>::within` is a symbol in the
rounding head and in neither the float head nor this one.
`Holds::through` inverts the multiply, so its widening is re-derived: each
rounding now drops a whole step where it dropped half of one, which doubles
the allowance for the two routes to a length, and the multiply on the way in
drops only downward, so its own step goes at the top of the range alone. The
derived allowance for one truncation either side is measurably too narrow --
it excludes boxes drawings were made in, in eleven generated cases -- because
each route is a chain of multiplies rather than one.
Measured on the fixed-shape fixture (`Edits::fixed_branches`), seed 1 depth 8,
500 frames of `many`, medians of 25 runs of uninstrumented release binaries
with this VM's garbage `perf` readings dropped:
| | instructions | cycles | IPC |
| --- | ---: | ---: | ---: |
| `5ed9e87`, the float head | 1,761M | 688M | 2.561 |
| `60367d8`, rounding | 1,915M | 777M | 2.465 |
| this | 1,800M | 715M | 2.516 |
-6.0% instructions and -8.0% cycles against `60367d8`, whose twenty-five work
counters are identical to this one's, so that pair is the same work at a
different speed. It leaves +2.2% and +3.9% against the float head, from
+8.7% and +12.9% -- but the float head draws 100 widgets to this one's 97 and
writes 4,272 primitives to 3,951, so that pair is not, and the remainder is
not all arithmetic.
Checked: fmt, clippy, 80 suite tests and 18 core unit tests, the release
oracle at 100 seeds, all fifteen shrinker cases at 400 seeds of depth 5 (seed
288 on `region-node` still failing, unchanged), and depth-6 oracle seeds 18
and 190 passing with 326 still failing. `view`, `minimal`, `text`, `random`
and the tab replay render byte-identical at 1920x1200; `tabs` differs on
4,664 of 2,304,000 pixels, single-pixel-wide runs along 80 columns of one
band of rounded rects, which is an antialiased edge moved less than a pixel.
Three tests say what changed rather than being relaxed: a multiply drops on
both sides of zero, a division cannot put back what it dropped, and an
unevenly nested row's shares stay contiguous and end at its edge with each
edge on the even division or one step below.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
`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>
Traced what was left of the warm-against-cold difference after fixed point.
It is not accumulation and not one place: it is the same box reached two
ways, and each way rounds where the other does not.
`Scroll` was writing a box it had been given back out as its own length in
pixels. That is the same box in another form, and centring a part in `rel 1`
lands a step from centring it in `px 900`, because halving a difference is
not halving each part of it. Content that fills the viewport and has not been
scrolled is now handed back as it came, which makes the shrinker's `repaint`
and `resize-repaint` cases agree exactly rather than within a step.
`Span` placed each child a step from where the last one ended, so the
rounding of every share was carried along the row. A position is now the
fixed parts before it -- a sum, exact -- plus one rounded share of the room.
Measured: two hundred equal shares of a 1000 px row ended at 999.999 and now
end at 1000, and `tests/cases/layout.rs` pins it at 2, 3, 7, 64 and 200.
What is left is a step per level of nesting between the two ways, which is
what the fuzzers now allow: four of the five shrinker cases pass at one step
and the fifth is five spans deep. Closing it needs one way of asking where a
box is, which is a bigger change than this.
Checked: fmt, clippy, 103 tests, all five shrinker cases at 300 seeds, 100
generated seeds, five examples byte-identical at 1920x1200.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
A span is as long across itself as its longest child, unless a rule beside it
already says how long it is -- and then reading the children answers nothing
and only makes its size depend on theirs. `OrthoSize::Full` was that second
case written twice, once as an enum on the span and once as the rule that
actually decides; `Painter::ruled` lets the span ask which it is in. The
widget under a rule still does not learn what the rule says, only that its
answer for that axis is not wanted.
The fuzzers grow, lay out and drop a tree within one seed, so the seeds share
nothing and take a thread each, one short of every core. Measured here: the
generated oracle's hundred seeds went from 68 s to 10 s, and a shrinker case
at 300 seeds from 18 s to 3.5 s. A seed that fails still shrinks and panics
on its own thread, and `std::thread::scope` carries that out.
The shrinker now allows the two steps the oracle already did -- the deeper
trees these grow reach a second composition, and a step is a thousandth of a
pixel.
Checked: fmt, clippy, 102 tests, all five shrinker cases at 300 seeds, 100
generated seeds, and five examples byte-identical at 1920x1200.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Eleven `tests/*.rs` were eleven binaries, each linking the whole graph --
`wgpu` and all -- to run a handful of cases. They are modules of one target
now, under `tests/cases/`, and `cargo test --test suite layout::` still picks
one out. The fuzzers and the `*_cost` measurements stay their own targets:
they are run on their own and want to be selectable without building the
rest.
`profile.test` takes `debug = "line-tables-only"`, which is what a backtrace
here actually reads; the type and variable information was the bulk of what
the linker was writing.
Measured on this machine, rebuilding `iris`'s test targets after a change to
the crate: 14.3 s before, 9.8 s with one target, 7.7 s with both. `target/`
went from 45 GB to 13 GB. The suite still passes 102 tests, and the binary
still carries `.debug_line`.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
iris-aiandClaude Opus 5