Summary:
To make React Native play nicely with our internal build infrastructure we need to properly namespace all of our header includes.
Where previously you could do `#import "RCTBridge.h"`, you must now write this as `#import <React/RCTBridge.h>`. If your xcode project still has a custom header include path, both variants will likely continue to work, but for new projects, we're defaulting the header include path to `$(BUILT_PRODUCTS_DIR)/usr/local/include`, where the React and CSSLayout targets will copy a subset of headers too. To make Xcode copy headers phase work properly, you may need to add React as an explicit dependency to your app's scheme and disable "parallelize build".
Reviewed By: mmmulani
Differential Revision: D4213120
fbshipit-source-id: 84a32a4b250c27699e6795f43584f13d594a9a82
Summary:
Expose aspectRatio style prop from css-layout to React Native.
This means the following will now work:
<View style={{backgroundColor: 'blue', aspectRatio: 1}}/>
Reviewed By: javache
Differential Revision: D4226472
fbshipit-source-id: c8709a7c0abbf77089a4e867879b42dcd9116f65
Summary: Correct header import paths, update podspec so we point at the copy in ReactCommon (and can eventually remove the copy under React)
Reviewed By: astreet
Differential Revision: D4204501
fbshipit-source-id: e979a010092f025b2cdc289e1e5f22fc7b65a8d1
Summary:
Include CSSLayout headers in the same way as other project headers, ie `#import <CSSLayout/CSSLayout.h>` becomes `#import "CSSLayout.h"`. CSSLayout is not a framework or system dependency, so shouldn't (AFAIK) be included with angle brackets. Doing so breaks framework builds, such as when RN is used as a pod in a swift project.
In combination with https://github.com/facebook/css-layout/pull/217 this fixes https://github.com/facebook/react-native/issues/9014 (specifically swift cocoapods projects). There is then no need for a separate CSSLayout pod subspec.
Tests run on the RN project in isolation (with changes inside `CSSLayout` itself also applied) and against a dummy swift project with RN included as a pod.
NB: This effectively reverts https://github.com/facebook/react-native/pull/9015 and may break non-swift cocoapods projects unless https://github.com/facebook/css-layout/pull/217 is merged and synced first.
Update: As discussed with alloy and emilsjolander, wrap these imports in a preprocess
Closes https://github.com/facebook/react-native/pull/9544
Differential Revision: D3821791
Pulled By: javache
fbshipit-source-id: d27ac8be9ce560d03479b43d3db740cd196c24da
Summary:
The overflow prop needs to be set on the shadow view so that it can make its way into the layout engine. In some situations, the value of the overflow prop affects the calculations of the layout engine.
**Test plan (required)**
Verified in a test app that the `overflow` prop makes its way into the layout engine. Also, my team's app is currently using this change.
Adam Comella
Microsoft Corp.
Closes https://github.com/facebook/react-native/pull/9659
Differential Revision: D3790552
fbshipit-source-id: 61513ece63ae214f48c6cb6f40fb29757a0ac706
Summary:
Sometimes is handy to check if a React node is a descendant of another node or not. For instance, I want to check if the focused `TextInput` is descendant of an specific `ScrollView`:
```js
const currentlyFocusedField = TextInput.State.currentlyFocusedField()
UIManager.viewIsAncestorOf(
currentlyFocusedField,
this.getInnerViewNode(),
(isAncestor) => {
if (isAncestor) {
console.log('The focused field is a descendant of this ScrollView!')
}
}
)
```
This function uses the same strategy as the `measureLayout` method to check if one node is an ancestor of other node. As the `measureLayout` method, this is performed outside the main thread.
By now I've only implemented the iOS version and its tests, but if this function is going to be merged I'll implement the Android version too. I have objc experience but no Java or Android, so I prefer to validate this functionality before jumping into developing the Android part.
Closes https://github.com/facebook/react-native/pull/7876
Differential Revision: D3662045
Pulled By: javache
fbshipit-source-id: b9668e8ea94fd01db76651f16243926cf9c2566f
Summary: RCTShadowText currently overrides a couple methods from RCTShadowView to reset the count of the cssNode children to 0. This diff instead moves that logic into RCTShadowView behind a configurable flag making it easier to reason about.
Reviewed By: javache
Differential Revision: D3586434
fbshipit-source-id: 4389a8119dc49e3fc4357174c87c0c69287ae385
Summary: fillCSSNode was only ever used in RCTShadowView to set the child count which is already performed in insert/remove subview calls and in RCTShadowText is was used to set the measure function which can be done in the initializer instead.
Reviewed By: majak, javache
Differential Revision: D3586418
fbshipit-source-id: de2155daf0f1702c8977bf23183a3b6a650d016b
Summary: Converted the zIndex property on iOS to NSInteger instead of double. This is consistent with the CSS spec, and helps to simplify the Android implementation.
Reviewed By: javache
Differential Revision: D3411491
fbshipit-source-id: 902ebc29aac39a65f7e8707a28607655f9f5052c
Summary:
This diff implement the CSS z-index for React Native iOS views. We've had numerous pull request for this feature, but they've all attempted to use the `layer.zPosition` property, which is problematic for two reasons:
1. zPosition only affects rendering order, not event processing order. Views with a higher zPosition will appear in front of others in the hierarchy, but won't be the first to receive touch events, and may be blocked by views that are visually behind them.
2. when using a perspective transform matrix, views with a nonzero zPosition will be rendered in a different position due to parallax, which probably isn't desirable.
See https://github.com/facebook/react-native/pull/7825 for further discussion of this problem.
So instead of using `layer.zPosition`, I've implemented this by actually adjusting the order of the subviews within their parent based on the zIndex. This can't be done on the JS side because it would affect layout, which is order-dependent, so I'm doing it inside the view itself.
It works as follows:
1. The `reactSubviews` array is set, whose order matches the order of the JS components and shadowView components, as specified by the UIManager.
2. `didUpdateReactSubviews` is called, which in turn calls `sortedSubviews` (which lazily generates a sorted array of `reactSubviews` by zIndex) and inserts the result into the view.
3. If a subview is added or removed, or the zIndex of any subview is changed, the previous `sortedSubviews` array is cleared and `didUpdateReactSubviews` is called again.
To demonstrate it working, I've modified the UIExplorer example from https://github.com/facebook/react-native/pull/7825
Reviewed By: javache
Differential Revision: D3365717
fbshipit-source-id: b34aa8bfad577bce023f8af5414f9b974aafd8aa
Summary:
This diff refactors the view update process into two stages:
1. The `reactSubviews` array is set, whose order matches the order of the JS components and shadowView components, as specified by the UIManager.
2. The `didUpdateReactSubviews` method is called, which actually inserts the reactSubviews into the view hierarchy.
This simplifies a lot of the hacks we had for special-case treatment of subviews: In many cases we don't want to actually insert `reactSubviews` into the parentView, and we had a bunch of component-specific solutions for that (typically overriding all of the reactSubviews methods to store views in an array). Now, we can simply override the `didUpdateReactSubviews` method for those views to do nothing, or do something different.
Reviewed By: wwjholmes
Differential Revision: D3396594
fbshipit-source-id: 92fc56fd31db0cfc66aac3d1634a4d4ae3903085
Summary:
Previously, only Text and Image could be nested within Text. Now, any
view can be nested within Text. One restriction of this feature is
that developers must give inline views a width and a height via
the style prop.
Previously, inline Images were supported by using iOS's built-in support
for rendering images with an NSAttributedString via NSTextAttachment.
However, NSAttributedString doesn't support rendering arbitrary views.
This change adds support for nesting views within Text by creating one
NSTextAttachment per inline view. The NSTextAttachments act as placeholders.
They are set to be the size of the corresponding view. After the text is
laid out, we query the text system to find out where it has positioned each
NSTextAttachment. We then position the views to be at those locations.
This commit also contains a change in `RCTShadowText.m`
`_setParagraphStyleOnAttributedString:heightOfTallestSubview:`. It now only sets
`lineHeight`, `textAlign`, and `writingDirection` when they've actua
Closes https://github.com/facebook/react-native/pull/7304
Reviewed By: javache
Differential Revision: D3365373
Pulled By: nicklockwood
fbshipit-source-id: 66d149eb80c5c6725311e1e46d7323eec086ce64
Summary:
Previously, only Text and Image could be nested within Text. Now, any
view can be nested within Text. One restriction of this feature is
that developers must give inline views a width and a height via
the style prop.
Previously, inline Images were supported by using iOS's built-in support
for rendering images with an NSAttributedString via NSTextAttachment.
However, NSAttributedString doesn't support rendering arbitrary views.
This change adds support for nesting views within Text by creating one
NSTextAttachment per inline view. The NSTextAttachments act as placeholders.
They are set to be the size of the corresponding view. After the text is
laid out, we query the text system to find out where it has positioned each
NSTextAttachment. We then position the views to be at those locations.
This commit also contains a change in `RCTShadowText.m`
`_setParagraphStyleOnAttributedString:heightOfTallestSubview:`. It now only sets
`lineHeight`, `textAlign`, and `writingDirection` when they've actua
Closes https://github.com/facebook/react-native/pull/7304
Differential Revision: D3269333
Pulled By: nicklockwood
fbshipit-source-id: 2b59f1c5445a4012f9c29df9f10f5010060ea517
Summary:It was hard to understand which parts of the shadowview API are designed to be called only on the root view, and which were applicable to any view.
This diff extracts rootview-specific logic out into a new RCTRootShadowView class.
Reviewed By: majak
Differential Revision: D3063905
fb-gh-sync-id: ef890cddfd7625fbd4bf5454314b441acdb03ac8
shipit-source-id: ef890cddfd7625fbd4bf5454314b441acdb03ac8
Summary:The UICollectionView example is actually my use-case, which is discussed in a
bit more detail [here](https://github.com/alloy/ReactNativeExperiments/issues/2).
----
This is useful when wrapping native iOS components that determine their
own suggested size and which would be too hard/unnecessary to replicate
in the shadow view. For instance a `UICollectionView` that after layout
will update its `contentSize`, which could be used to suggest a size to
the shadow view.
The reason for adding it to -[RCTShadowView setFrame:] is mainly so it
can be used via the existing -[RCTUIManager setFrame:forView:] API and
because it might not be a feature you want to expose too prominently.
An origin of `{ NAN, NAN }` is used as a sentinel to indicate that the
frame should be used as a size suggestion. The size portion of the rect
may contain a `NAN` to skip that dimension or a suggested value for the
dimension which will be used if no explicit styling has been assigned.
Examples:
* Without any expl
Closes https://github.com/facebook/react-native/pull/6114
Differential Revision: D2994796
Pulled By: nicklockwood
fb-gh-sync-id: 6dd3dd86a352ca7d31a0da38bc38a2859ed0a410
shipit-source-id: 6dd3dd86a352ca7d31a0da38bc38a2859ed0a410
Summary:
An initial implementation was done on css-layout but isn't working correctly on many cases. The binding from React Native has been removed a long time ago. Let's not confuse people and remove it from the docs :)
Closes https://github.com/facebook/react-native/pull/5522
Reviewed By: svcscm
Differential Revision: D2859665
Pulled By: vjeux
fb-gh-sync-id: 4aa008dd93a6cea6b79a7bce444c94148791eee4
Summary: There is no point in using `updateLayout` when we have `didSetProps`.
The only a bit risky part is calling `dirtyLayout` in `setFrame:forView:` instead of `updateLayout`,
but since setting frame shouldn't really change border/margin/padding it should be ok.
Depends on D2699512.
public
Reviewed By: nicklockwood
Differential Revision: D2700012
fb-gh-sync-id: a7c33b3b4e3ddc195bebebb8b03934131af016fb
Summary: public
Added lightweight genarics annotations to make the code more readable and help the compiler catch bugs.
Fixed some type bugs and improved bridge validation in a few places.
Reviewed By: javache
Differential Revision: D2600189
fb-gh-sync-id: f81e22f2cdc107bf8d0b15deec6d5b83aacc5b56
Summary:
Currently, the system for mapping JS event handlers to blocks is quite clean on the JS side, but is clunky on the native side. The event property is passed as a boolean, which can then be checked by the native side, and if true, the native side is supposed to send an event via the event dispatcher.
This diff adds the facility to declare the property as a block instead. This means that the event side can simply call the block, and it will automatically send the event. Because the blocks for bubbling and direct events are named differently, we can also use this to generate the event registration data and get rid of the arrays of event names.
The name of the event is inferred from the property name, which means that the property for an event called "load" must be called `onLoad` or the mapping won't work. This can be optionally remapped to a different property name on the view itself if necessary, e.g.
RCT_REMAP_VIEW_PROPERTY(onLoad, loadEventBlock, RCTDirectEventBlock)
If you don't want to use this mechanism then for now it is still possible to declare the property as a BOOL instead and use the old mechanism (this approach is now deprecated however, and may eventually be removed altogether).
Summary:
Moved the view creation & property binding logic out of RCTUIManager into a separate RCTComponentData class - this follows the pattern used with the bridge.
I've also updated the property binding to use pre-allocated blocks for setting the values, which is more efficient than the previous system that re-contructed the selectors each time it was called. This should improve view update performance significantly.
Summary:
Remove layout-only views. Works by checking properties against a list of known properties that only affect layout. The `RCTShadowView` hierarchy still has a 1:1 correlation with the JS nodes.
This works by adjusting the tags and indices in `manageChildren`. For example, if JS told us to insert tag 1 at index 0 and tag 1 is layout-only with children whose tags are 2 and 3, we adjust it so we insert tags 2 and 3 at indices 0 and 1. This keeps changes out of `RCTView` and `RCTScrollView`. In order to simplify this logic, view moves are now processed as view removals followed by additions. A move from index 0 to 1 is recorded as a removal of view at indices 0 and 1 and an insertion of tags 1 and 2 at indices 0 and 1. Of course, the remaining indices have to be offset to take account for this.
The `collapsible` attribute is a bit of a hack to force `RCTScrollView` to always have one child. This was easier than rethinking out the logic there, but we could change this later.
Summary:
Remove layout-only views. Works by checking properties against a list of known properties that only affect layout. The `RCTShadowView` hierarchy still has a 1:1 correlation with the JS nodes.
This works by adjusting the tags and indices in `manageChildren`. For example, if JS told us to insert tag 1 at index 0 and tag 1 is layout-only with children whose tags are 2 and 3, we adjust it so we insert tags 2 and 3 at indices 0 and 1. This keeps changes out of `RCTView` and `RCTScrollView`. In order to simplify this logic, view moves are now processed as view removals followed by additions. A move from index 0 to 1 is recorded as a removal of view at indices 0 and 1 and an insertion of tags 1 and 2 at indices 0 and 1. Of course, the remaining indices have to be offset to take account for this.
The `collapsible` attribute is a bit of a hack to force `RCTScrollView` to always have one child. This was easier than rethinking out the logic there, but we could change this later.
@public
Test Plan: There are tests in `RCTUIManagerTests.m` that test the tag- and index-manipulation logic works. There are various scenarios including add-only, remove-only, and move. In addition, two scenario tests verify that the optimization works by checking the number of views and shadow views after various situations happen.
Summary:
Simply add an `onLayout` callback to a native view component, and the callback
will be invoked with the current layout information when the view is mounted and
whenever the layout changes.
The only limitation is that scroll position and other stuff the layout system
isn't aware of is not taken into account. This is because onLayout events
wouldn't be triggered for these changes and if they are desired they should be
tracked separately (e.g. with `onScroll`) and combined.
Also fixes some bugs with LayoutAnimation callbacks.
@public
Test Plan:
- Run new LayoutEventsExample in UIExplorer and see it work correctly.
- New integration test passes internally (IntegrationTest project seems busted).
- New jest test case passes.
{F22318433}
```
2015-05-06 15:45:05.848 [info][tid:com.facebook.React.JavaScript] "Running application "UIExplorerApp" with appParams: {"rootTag":1,"initialProps":{}}. __DEV__ === true, development-level warning are ON, performance optimizations are OFF"
2015-05-06 15:45:05.881 [info][tid:com.facebook.React.JavaScript] "received text layout event
", {"target":27,"layout":{"y":123,"x":12.5,"width":140.5,"height":18}}
2015-05-06 15:45:05.882 [info][tid:com.facebook.React.JavaScript] "received image layout event
", {"target":23,"layout":{"y":12.5,"x":122,"width":50,"height":50}}
2015-05-06 15:45:05.883 [info][tid:com.facebook.React.JavaScript] "received view layout event
", {"target":22,"layout":{"y":70.5,"x":20,"width":294,"height":204}}
2015-05-06 15:45:05.897 [info][tid:com.facebook.React.JavaScript] "received text layout event
", {"target":27,"layout":{"y":206.5,"x":12.5,"width":140.5,"height":18}}
2015-05-06 15:45:05.897 [info][tid:com.facebook.React.JavaScript] "received view layout event
", {"target":22,"layout":{"y":70.5,"x":20,"width":294,"height":287.5}}
2015-05-06 15:45:09.847 [info][tid:com.facebook.React.JavaScript] "layout animation done."
2015-05-06 15:45:09.847 [info][tid:com.facebook.React.JavaScript] "received image layout event
", {"target":23,"layout":{"y":12.5,"x":82,"width":50,"height":50}}
2015-05-06 15:45:09.848 [info][tid:com.facebook.React.JavaScript] "received view layout event
", {"target":22,"layout":{"y":110.5,"x":60,"width":214,"height":287.5}}
2015-05-06 15:45:09.862 [info][tid:com.facebook.React.JavaScript] "received text layout event
", {"target":27,"layout":{"y":206.5,"x":12.5,"width":120,"height":68}}
2015-05-06 15:45:09.863 [info][tid:com.facebook.React.JavaScript] "received image layout event
", {"target":23,"layout":{"y":12.5,"x":55,"width":50,"height":50}}
2015-05-06 15:45:09.863 [info][tid:com.facebook.React.JavaScript] "received view layout event
", {"target":22,"layout":{"y":128,"x":60,"width":160,"height":337.5}}
```
Emil Sjolander
Pieter De Baets
rh389
Adam Comella
alvaromb
Wenjing Wang
Nick Lockwood
Eloy Durán
Christopher Chedeau
Martin Kralik
rocman
Pawel Sienkowski
Spencer Ahrens
Alexsander Akers
chaceliang