`try_reuse` asks whether the widget in front of it is dirty and, if not,
hands its parent the size it last reported. Nothing asks whether a dirty
widget sits under it through the size dependencies -- which is the check
`retained_size` makes, for exactly this reason, on the path that does not
draw.
What covers the gap is the order `redraw_updates` settles in: taking the
deepest dirty widget first means that by the time a reader draws, what it
reads has already drawn and propagated. Drawing in any other order
returns a stale size. Measured rather than reasoned: picking whatever the
dirty set yields first fails seed 2 of `tests/generated.rs` with 24
widgets wrong, a subtree keeping a 317 px width where a cold tree has
147, and the traces are identical until a `Span` reports 317 against 147
from the same child sizes -- it had reused a subtree holding a `SetSize`
whose declared width had changed.
So the coupling is real and was written down nowhere. Say it in both
places, since a reader of either would otherwise conclude the order is
about cost.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
iris-aiandClaude Opus 5
bf9438087a