Grid interactivity: Improve how grid resizer handles 0-width and 0-height cells #61423
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
noisysocks
added
[Type] Bug
|
The following accounts have interacted with this PR and/or linked issues. I will continue to update these lists as activity occurs. You can also manually ask me to refresh this list by adding the If you're merging code through a pull request on GitHub, copy and paste the following into the bottom of the merge commit message. To understand the WordPress project's expectations around crediting contributors, please review the Contributor Attribution page in the Core Handbook. |
|
Size Change: +37 B (0%) Total Size: 1.74 MB
ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
noisysocks
added
[Type] Experimental
andrewserong
approved these changes
May 8, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nice subtle fix, and thanks for the explanation about why this is the preferred approach 👍
Tests well for me, with the ability to now drag close to, but not quite onto the empty row, for it to then snap to the row:
2024-05-08.10.22.12.mp4
Just left a question about whether it'd be useful to add unit tests at this stage to cover the logic, but feel free to ignore it aids the iterative development to not lock things in place just yet.
LGTM!
| function getGridLines( template, gap ) { | ||
| const lines = [ 0 ]; | ||
| function getGridTracks( template, gap ) { | ||
| const tracks = []; | ||
| for ( const size of template.split( ' ' ) ) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not to worry about for this PR, but just wondering if we'll ever need to handle templates with more complex values for each of the columns or rows? I.e. if a function is used like minmax then the space character would be between part of a function value instead of between each column value. We don't yet support complex values, so I don't think there's anything we need to do to handle it just yet, but thought I'd mention it in case we need a safe escape point / bail early if the values aren't what we expect.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That won't be a problem as long as the values we pass to this function come from getComputedCSS, because computed values will all be in px. I guess it might be good to make it clear that that's what this function expects 😅
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, excellent. Thanks for explaining!
| ( closest, line, index ) => | ||
| Math.abs( line - position ) < | ||
| Math.abs( lines[ closest ] - position ) | ||
| function getClosestTrack( tracks, position, edge = 'start' ) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it worth adding unit tests for these two functions? Being unfamiliar with this code it took me a little while to wrap my head around what it's doing (grabbing a computed CSS value, splitting it into parts, and then providing values for distances to closest edge). I think I'd struggle a little bit attempting to debug or tweak the logic if I had to, so wondered if a couple of tests might help document the expected behaviour.
Of course, I understand this is still experimental and the feature is in flux, so no worries if you think it's too early to lock the behaviour in place!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unit tests would be good at some point but I think what would also be good for clarity would be a docblock. Too many of our internal functions aren't documented at all, and even just a line describing what it does, parameters and return values can be super helpful!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, a docblock comment would be great! Especially while you're still moving things around, I reckon a little documentation is probably quicker and easier than unit tests at this point 👍
tellthemachines
approved these changes
May 8, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agree with @andrewserong on the docs/future tests; otherwise this LGTM!
noisysocks
force-pushed
the
fix/grid-resizing-over-empty-cells
branch
from
a49c929 to
0a0a87c
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What?
Small fix that I've split out of #59490.
Improves the grid item resizer's handling of empty 0-width or 0-height cells.
Why?
It's basically impossible in
trunkto resize a grid item using the drag handles to span an empty row. This PR improves the logic of how resizing is calculated to fix this.How?
In
trunkwe're using grid lines to calculate the span. A grid line is where the cell starts. The problem with this approach is that you need to drag the resize box to be close to the start of the next cell in order to span a cell. This is fine when the cell is a normal size but is impossible when it has no width or height.So instead of calculating the new span using grid lines which is just where a cell starts, use grid tracks which contains where a cell starts and where it ends. We can then calculate the span by looking for the nearest end track and subtracting the nearest start track. This correctly handles the case where a cell has no width or height.
It's also just more logically correct 😊
Testing Instructions
Screenshots or screencast
Before:
Kapture.2024-05-07.at.16.08.07.mp4
After:
Kapture.2024-05-07.at.16.08.43.mp4