JoshHeaps.Net/wwwroot/css/casino/holdem.css

@@ -3876,9 +3876,57 @@ body.hasActionBar #toastHost {
        max-height leaves the width alone and lets the aspect ratio give way, so a short
        screen gets a wide oval, which is the shape a poker table is anyway. Measured at
        360x640: 336x240 rather than 240x240, same clearance, and the twelve-seat ring
-       that was crowded at 240 comes out clean. Where the room isn't the binding
+       that was crowded at 240 comes out clean.
-       constraint — 390x844 and up — nothing changes and the table stays round. */
+
+       "Where the room isn't the binding constraint — 390x844 and up — nothing changes
+       and the table stays round" is what this used to say, and it was true and it was
+       the bug. A square felt on a portrait phone can never be taller than it is wide,
+       so on every phone with room to spare the surplus was measured, published, and
+       dropped: 522px of room under a 366px felt on an iPhone 14, 638 under 406 on a Pro
+       Max. Nothing was wrong with the arithmetic. The shape simply refused the answer.
+
+       So the preferred shape is an oval standing up, and the cap above stays to stop it.
+       A phone is a portrait screen and this is a table seen from above — the wide layout
+       has been an oval lying down (0.72) all along, and the two are the same decision
+       made twice. What it buys is rim: twelve seats at 390x844 went from a 44px puck
+       with five names clipped to 66px with one, and five seats went from three clipped
+       to none.
+
+       1.5 is where the sweep stops paying. 1.6 and 1.7 measured byte-identical to each
+       other on every phone, because by then the room is the binding constraint again;
+       between 1.35 and 1.5 the twelve-seat ring on a Pixel 7 goes from one clipped name
+       to none. The three smaller phones are room-bound at any cap at all and measured
+       identical from 1.15 to 1.7, so this cannot regress them.
+
+       It was tempting to pick a lower number and claim it bought stillness — a felt
+       whose height *is* --feltRoomPx moves every time the bar does. That claim was
+       written here and it was wrong: the bar's growth was measured at 125px resting,
+       233px with six players all in, and 341px with twelve and their nine side pots
+       listed. 216px of growth is more slack than any phone has at any aspect ratio, so
+       there is no number here that buys stillness. renderSeats() is
+       already told when the room changes, which is the thing that actually holds the
+       chips on their seats, and this rule stops trying to.
+
+       A floor under the max-height was tried here and taken out again, which is worth
+       writing down because it looks obviously right. The worry was that max-height has
+       no lower bound, so a tall enough bar presses the felt flat; the fix was to floor
+       it at 72cqw, the wide layout's own oval, so the worst a phone could do was arrive
+       at the shape the desktop already has.
+
+       It made things worse. Twelve players all in with nine side pots is the tallest the
+       bar gets — 341px — and at 360x640 that leaves 142px of room. Floored to 242 the
+       felt keeps its shape and puts five of the twelve seats behind the bar; unfloored
+       at 142 it is a flat table with all twelve of them visible. Same on an iPhone SE,
+       three seats against none. A covered seat is the fault this whole measurement
+       exists to prevent, and a flat table is only ugly.
+
+       The slit the floor was defending against was never reachable either. It came from
+       forcing --feltRoomPx to 10px by hand; the real floor is FELT_FLOOR_PX at 96, and
+       the worst any of these phones actually publishes is 142, which lays out fine.
+
+       Landscape overrides all of this outright, further down the file. */
     #pokerTableWrap {
+        --feltAspect: 1.5;
         max-width: none;
         max-height: var(--feltRoomPx, 100vh);
     }
@@ -3898,11 +3946,6 @@ body.hasActionBar #toastHost {
         grid-template-columns: 1fr;
     }
 
-    /* One column, so the table has the full width and can afford to be round. */
-    #pokerTableWrap {
-        --feltAspect: 1;
-    }
-
     /* No width here any more. This was 78px, and two blocks below it were 64 and 62 —
        three guesses, at three breakpoints, at the one number that depends on something
        a media query cannot see: how many people are sitting down. The same 390px phone
@@ -3912,6 +3955,17 @@ body.hasActionBar #toastHost {
     }
 }
 
+/* One column, and still wide enough that a round table fits. Below 701px the block
+   further up stands the oval up instead, which is why this has to be written as a
+   range rather than as another max-width: both queries match a phone, they set the
+   same custom property at the same specificity, and the one lower in the file wins.
+   It did win, for a while, and the upright oval above was dead text. */
+@media (min-width: 701px) and (max-width: 900px) {
+    #pokerTableWrap {
+        --feltAspect: 1;
+    }
+}
+
 /* ---------- Phones ----------
    Two things break on a narrow screen: seat pucks ring the table on a radius
    measured from the wrap, so the left- and right-most ones hang off the edge of

tests/holdem/README.md

@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ other in the page, in the load order from `TexasHoldem.cshtml`.
 | `handRank.test.js` | What beats what: categories, the wheel, kickers, best five of seven |
 | `readingTheShowdown.test.js` | The board, the picker that fills it, and who wins a side pot |
 | `theRail.test.js` | A phone on its side: which shape the bar is in, what it leaves under the felt, how a name is shortened, how the ring is pulled back onto the table |
+| `feltShape.test.js` | What shape the felt is at each phone size, resolved through the media queries in source order (see below) |
 | `invariants.test.js` | 1000 randomised hands per property (see below) |
 
 ## The layout audit
@@ -155,6 +156,34 @@ something changed, and each time they only covered whatever had just been touche
 That is how the standings table shipped with a player-name column zero pixels wide
 and kept it for two rounds.
 
+## Which rule wins
+
+`feltShape.test.js` is here because of a change that measured as correct and was a
+no-op. The felt on a phone was made an upright oval by setting `--feltAspect` inside
+`@media (max-width: 700px)`, and forty lines below it `@media (max-width: 900px)` set
+the same property back to 1. Both queries match a phone, the declarations have the same
+specificity, and the later one wins — so the property was 1 on every phone on the site
+while the rule that was supposed to change it sat there reading perfectly.
+
+Nothing in the suite could have caught it and nothing in review did. A stylesheet is not
+a list of rules for viewports; it is a list of rules in an order, and the question "what
+does a 390px phone get?" has an answer that no single rule knows. So the test walks the
+media queries the way the cascade does — every declaration of a property on a selector,
+in source order, keeping the last one whose query matches — and asks what each of five
+real phone sizes actually ends up with. It carries just enough of a media-query engine
+for the forms this stylesheet uses, and refuses loudly rather than guessing when it
+meets one it doesn't know.
+
+The same file records a second thing, which is a floor that was added and removed. The
+`max-height` that keeps the felt above the action bar has no lower bound, so a tall
+enough bar presses the table flat; flooring it at the desktop oval looked obviously
+right. Measured, it was worse: twelve players all in with nine side pots takes the bar
+to 341px, which at 360x640 leaves 142px of room, and a felt floored to 242px keeps its
+shape by putting five of the twelve seats behind the bar. Unfloored it is flat and all
+twelve are visible. The slit the floor defended against turned out to be unreachable —
+it came from forcing the custom property by hand. A test now asserts the floor is
+*absent*, with the numbers, so it doesn't get re-added by someone reasoning the same way.
+
 ## Why the hand evaluator is tested the way it is
 
 `handRank.js` is the only module here that can pay the wrong person without anybody

tests/holdem/feltShape.test.js

@@ -0,0 +1,165 @@
+// What shape the felt ends up, which is a question about which rule wins.
+//
+// feltRoom.test.js covers how much room there is. This covers what the stylesheet does
+// with it, and it exists because of a bug that no amount of reading caught: the upright
+// oval for phones was written into the `max-width: 700px` block, and the `max-width:
+// 900px` block below it set the same custom property back to 1. Both queries match a
+// phone, the two declarations have identical specificity, and the later one wins. The
+// rule was correct, the arithmetic was correct, and the property was 1 on every phone
+// on the site. It measured as a no-op and would have shipped as one.
+//
+// So this walks the media queries the way the cascade does — in source order, keeping
+// the last one that matches — instead of trusting that a rule written for a viewport is
+// the rule that viewport gets.
+const test = require("node:test");
+const { describe } = require("node:test");
+const assert = require("node:assert");
+const fs = require("fs");
+const path = require("path");
+
+const CSS = fs.readFileSync(
+    path.join(__dirname, "..", "..", "JoshHeaps.Net", "wwwroot", "css", "casino", "holdem.css"), "utf8");
+
+// Comments carry example numbers and at least one worked-through `--feltAspect: 1`, so
+// they come out before anything here counts declarations.
+const SOURCE = CSS.replace(/\/\*[\s\S]*?\*\//g, "");
+
+// --- just enough of a media query engine to answer "does this viewport match?" -------
+//
+// Only the forms this stylesheet actually uses: width and height bounds, orientation,
+// and `and` between them. Anything else is refused loudly rather than guessed at, so a
+// new kind of query can't quietly start matching everything.
+const matches = (condition, view) => {
+    if (!condition) return true;
+    return condition.split(/\s+and\s+/).every(part => {
+        const m = part.trim().match(/^\(\s*([a-z-]+)\s*:\s*([^)]+?)\s*\)$/);
+        assert.ok(m, `feltShape can't read the query "${part}" — teach it or simplify the CSS`);
+        const [, feature, raw] = m;
+        const px = parseFloat(raw);
+        switch (feature) {
+            case "min-width": return view.width >= px;
+            case "max-width": return view.width <= px;
+            case "min-height": return view.height >= px;
+            case "max-height": return view.height <= px;
+            case "orientation":
+                return raw === (view.width > view.height ? "landscape" : "portrait");
+            default:
+                assert.fail(`feltShape doesn't know the media feature "${feature}"`);
+        }
+    });
+};
+
+// Every style rule in the file, in source order, with the media condition it sits
+// under. Written as a brace walk rather than a regex because a regex for `max-height`
+// also finds it in `@media (orientation: landscape) and (max-height: 560px)`, and a
+// media feature is not a declaration.
+const rules = () => {
+    const out = [];
+    const open = [];
+    let prelude = "", i = 0;
+    while (i < SOURCE.length) {
+        const c = SOURCE[i];
+        if (c === "{") {
+            const head = prelude.trim();
+            prelude = "";
+            if (head.startsWith("@")) { open.push(head); i++; continue; }
+            let depth = 1, j = i + 1;
+            while (j < SOURCE.length && depth > 0) {
+                if (SOURCE[j] === "{") depth++;
+                else if (SOURCE[j] === "}") depth--;
+                j++;
+            }
+            const media = open.filter(h => h.startsWith("@media"))
+                .map(h => h.replace(/^@media\s*/, "")).join(" and ");
+            out.push({ selector: head, condition: media || null, body: SOURCE.slice(i + 1, j - 1) });
+            i = j;
+            continue;
+        }
+        if (c === "}") { open.pop(); prelude = ""; i++; continue; }
+        prelude += c;
+        i++;
+    }
+    return out;
+};
+
+const ALL_RULES = rules();
+
+// The cascade, for equal-specificity declarations of one property on one selector: the
+// last one whose query matches is the one the viewport gets.
+const winnerAt = (selector, prop, view) => {
+    const winning = ALL_RULES
+        .filter(r => r.selector === selector && matches(r.condition, view))
+        .map(r => r.body.match(new RegExp(`(?:^|;)\\s*${prop}\\s*:\\s*([^;]+)`)))
+        .filter(Boolean)
+        .pop();
+    assert.ok(winning, `nothing sets ${prop} on ${selector} at ${view.width}x${view.height}`);
+    return winning[1].trim();
+};
+
+const PHONES = [
+    { width: 360, height: 640, name: "Galaxy S8" },
+    { width: 375, height: 667, name: "iPhone SE" },
+    { width: 390, height: 844, name: "iPhone 14" },
+    { width: 412, height: 915, name: "Pixel 7" },
+    { width: 430, height: 932, name: "Pro Max" },
+];
+
+// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+describe("the shape a phone gets", () => {
+    test("is an oval standing up, on every one of them", () => {
+        PHONES.forEach(phone => {
+            const aspect = parseFloat(winnerAt("#pokerTableWrap", "--feltAspect", phone));
+            assert.ok(aspect > 1.2,
+                `${phone.name} lands on --feltAspect: ${aspect}. A portrait phone is ` +
+                `tall and this is what uses it; anything at or under 1 is the square ` +
+                `felt that threw the room away.`);
+        });
+    });
+
+    test("and a wide screen still gets one lying down", () => {
+        // The desktop felt is the shape it always was. Whatever the phones do, this is
+        // the one a poker table looks like when there is room for it.
+        assert.equal(parseFloat(winnerAt("#pokerTableWrap", "--feltAspect", { width: 1280, height: 900 })), 0.72);
+    });
+
+    test("with the middle widths in between left round", () => {
+        // 701-900px is one column and wide enough that neither oval is called for. It
+        // has to be written as a range: a bare max-width would match the phones too and,
+        // sitting lower in the file, would win there.
+        [{ width: 768, height: 1024 }, { width: 900, height: 700 }].forEach(view => {
+            assert.equal(parseFloat(winnerAt("#pokerTableWrap", "--feltAspect", view)), 1);
+        });
+    });
+});
+
+describe("what stops the oval", () => {
+    const phoneRule = winnerAt("#pokerTableWrap", "max-height", { width: 390, height: 844 });
+
+    test("is the room and nothing but the room", () => {
+        // The oval is a preference and the room is a fact. Whatever shape is asked for
+        // above, the felt gives way to the measurement rather than the other way round,
+        // because the thing on the other side of the cap is a seat behind the action bar.
+        assert.equal(phoneRule, "var(--feltRoomPx, 100vh)");
+    });
+
+    test("and it is not floored, however tempting that is", () => {
+        // A floor at the desktop oval — max(var(--feltRoomPx), 72cqw) — was written here
+        // and measured out again. Twelve players all in with nine side pots is the
+        // tallest the bar gets, 341px, and at 360x640 that leaves 142px of room. Floored
+        // to 242 the felt keeps its shape and hides five of the twelve seats behind the
+        // bar. Unfloored at 142 it is flat and all twelve are visible.
+        //
+        // The slit it was defending against wasn't reachable: that came from forcing
+        // --feltRoomPx to 10px by hand, and the real floor is FELT_FLOOR_PX at 96.
+        assert.doesNotMatch(phoneRule, /max\(/,
+            "a floor here trades a flat table for a covered seat, which is the worse of " +
+            "the two — see the comment above the rule");
+    });
+
+    test("and the width is let go of, so the height can be the one that binds", () => {
+        // The wide layout sizes the felt from its width and caps that. On a phone the
+        // width is the column and the height is what's scarce, so the cap moves.
+        assert.equal(winnerAt("#pokerTableWrap", "max-width", { width: 390, height: 844 }), "none");
+    });
+});