[css-flexbox] logical widths are always definite.

[css-flexbox] logical widths are always definite.

Per guidance from the CSS working group we should always treat widths
as definite, which allows us to simplify & speed up some code in
Flexbox.

See also https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2016May/0135.html
which I believe covers all the cases where they might not be (=shrinkwrapping).

Because this means that for widths we always use the actual width of the
element for percentage calculations, we can remove some code from LayoutBox too.

BUG=595361
Committed: https://crrev.com/237e6796e049700ccb7adf105d3f95ba9572e66c
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#396584}

[cbiesinger, 2016-05-27 20:16:37]

The CQ bit was checked by cbiesinger@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-27 20:16:54]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/2022553002/1
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/2022553002/1

[cbiesinger, 2016-05-27 20:18:43]

Description was changed from

==========
widths are always definite.

Per guidance from the CSS working group we should always treat widths
as definite, which allows us to simplify & speed up some code in
Flexbox.

See also https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2016May/0135.html
which I believe covers all the cases where they might not be (=shrinkwrapping).

Because this means that for widths we always use the actual width of the
element for percentage calculations, we can remove some code from LayoutBox too.

BUG=595361
==========

to

==========
[css-flexbox] logical widths are always definite.

Per guidance from the CSS working group we should always treat widths
as definite, which allows us to simplify & speed up some code in
Flexbox.

See also https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2016May/0135.html
which I believe covers all the cases where they might not be (=shrinkwrapping).

Because this means that for widths we always use the actual width of the
element for percentage calculations, we can remove some code from LayoutBox too.

BUG=595361
==========

[cbiesinger, 2016-05-27 20:18:43]

cbiesinger@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ eae@chromium.org

[eae, 2016-05-27 20:44:38]

Nice! LGTM

[cbiesinger, 2016-05-27 20:59:59]

The CQ bit was unchecked by cbiesinger@chromium.org

[cbiesinger, 2016-05-27 21:00:02]

The CQ bit was checked by cbiesinger@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-27 21:00:35]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/2022553002/1
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/2022553002/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-27 22:20:28]

Description was changed from

==========
[css-flexbox] logical widths are always definite.

Per guidance from the CSS working group we should always treat widths
as definite, which allows us to simplify & speed up some code in
Flexbox.

See also https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2016May/0135.html
which I believe covers all the cases where they might not be (=shrinkwrapping).

Because this means that for widths we always use the actual width of the
element for percentage calculations, we can remove some code from LayoutBox too.

BUG=595361
==========

to

==========
[css-flexbox] logical widths are always definite.

Per guidance from the CSS working group we should always treat widths
as definite, which allows us to simplify & speed up some code in
Flexbox.

See also https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2016May/0135.html
which I believe covers all the cases where they might not be (=shrinkwrapping).

Because this means that for widths we always use the actual width of the
element for percentage calculations, we can remove some code from LayoutBox too.

BUG=595361
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-27 22:20:29]

Committed patchset #1 (id:1)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-27 22:22:36]

Description was changed from

==========
[css-flexbox] logical widths are always definite.

Per guidance from the CSS working group we should always treat widths
as definite, which allows us to simplify & speed up some code in
Flexbox.

See also https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2016May/0135.html
which I believe covers all the cases where they might not be (=shrinkwrapping).

Because this means that for widths we always use the actual width of the
element for percentage calculations, we can remove some code from LayoutBox too.

BUG=595361
==========

to

==========
[css-flexbox] logical widths are always definite.

Per guidance from the CSS working group we should always treat widths
as definite, which allows us to simplify & speed up some code in
Flexbox.

See also https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2016May/0135.html
which I believe covers all the cases where they might not be (=shrinkwrapping).

Because this means that for widths we always use the actual width of the
element for percentage calculations, we can remove some code from LayoutBox too.

BUG=595361

Committed: https://crrev.com/237e6796e049700ccb7adf105d3f95ba9572e66c
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#396584}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-27 22:22:37]

Patchset 1 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/237e6796e049700ccb7adf105d3f95ba9572e66c
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#396584}