* [ASCollectionView] Initial pass at reducing double-sided animations
* [ASCollectionView] Always suppress animation during node size requery
* [ASCollectionView] Rejigger the invalidation logic to support animated size changes
* [ASCollectionView] Remove unused header
* [ASCollectionView] Change comment
* [ASDataController] Remove unused variable
* [ASCollectionView] When relayout animated due to cell size change, wait until next layout pass
* [ASCollectionView] Invalidate layout synchronously
* [ASCollectionView] Only read the layout object once
* [ASCollectionView] When size changes, wait for requery before layout
* [ASCollectionView] Sort of go back to using an empty update to handle node resizing
* [ASCollectionView] Remove unused constant
* [ASCollectionView] Address PR comments
* [ASCollectionView] Prevent nested [super performBatchUpdates:] calls
* [AsyncDisplayKit+Utilities.h] UIImage category for performant (optionally rounded) flat color stretchable images
* treat clear background color as no background color (D99117)
* add borderWidth
* add several shorter methods per Scott's comment
* rename files and add to AsyncDisplayKit.h
* fix xcode project file
* update commentse
This situation is relatively uncommon. If a user manually uses -[UIView addSubnode:], the convenience category method,
and then calls -[ASDisplayNode removeFromSuperview] -- we would bypass performing the actual removal as no supernode pointer
is set. After further consideration, the special handling here to support divergence between the supernode pointer and
the view / layer hierarchy is not something we need to maintain going forward, and removing it makes addressing this easy.
* [ASTableView] constrainedSizeForRowAtIndexPath
* Quick fix to header file
* Switch to Delegate from DataSource.
* Update testing variables to reflect switch to delegate
* [ASDataController] Add some assertions to clarify what queues things happen on
* [ASCollectionDataController] Optimize willReloadData
* [ASDataController] Minor optimizations, no functional changes
* [ASDataController] Always reload data on _editingTransactionQueue
* [ASDataController] Remove async data fetching option, deprecate callbacks
* [ASDataController] Not mutable
* [ASMultidimensionalArrayUtils] Use fast enumeration
* Optimize ASMultidimensionalArrayUtils
* Don't relayout as a result of clearing a traitCollection's context
I'm not completely sure this change is the best solution. Here is context:
An ASEnvironmentTraitCollection has a pointer to an optional context that an ASVC is the owner of. When the ASVC is dealloc'ed, we go through all subnodes of the VC and clear out the context so that the struct isn't holding on to a garbage pointer.
Setting the traitCollection on ASCollectionNode/ASTableNode causes the cells to relayout if the trait collection changed (this is a special case for these two nodes since their cells are not actually subnodes). Setting the context to nil registered as a trait collection change and was causing a layout even as we were dealloc'ing the VC.
The logic I'm implementing here is:
If the trait collection changed AND the displayContext did not, then we should relayout.
If the trait collection changed AND the new displayContext is non-nil then we should layout
In the case where the trait collection change was caused soley by the displayContext going from non-nil to nil, then we should NOT layout.
```
// At this point we know that the two traits collections are NOT equal for some reason
BOOL needsLayout = (oldTraits.displayContext == currentTraits.displayContext) || currentTraits.displayContext != nil;
```
Is there a better place/safer way to do this?
* removed extra setNeedsLayout call
