The review pass over the two commits before it:
- `LayoutHolds`'s comment said a pin does not compose into the parent. It
does, where the box it pinned is the parent's own box, which is the one
case where the parent's own length is what was pinned.
- `DrawInfo::offer` was stored beside the two fields it is computed from.
It is a method now, with the open question written where it is asked
rather than only in the handoff.
- `Painter::own` is `frame_own` beside `extent_own`, since a widget's own
box is the extent and the frame is what it is a part of.
- One expression for the length a rule gives a frame (`narrowed_by`) and
one for what a widget answered (`ActiveData::measured`), each of which
had two.
- The counter said "the placement it was pinned to" for what is now a
length; the deferral in `redraw` named the seeds that made it necessary
before the last commit rather than the ones that do now; three comments
claimed an inset that does not exist yet.
No behaviour change: 108 suite tests, 20 core, the 11 generated cases, the
same two shrinker seeds failing at 400/5, and `view` and `tabs` byte-identical
to the renders taken before it.
iris-ai
49cec82c1b