Notice (2018-05-24): bugzilla.xamarin.com is now in
Please join us on
Visual Studio Developer Community and in the
Mono organizations on
GitHub to continue tracking issues. Bugzilla will remain
available for reference in read-only mode. We will continue to work
on open Bugzilla bugs, copy them to the new locations
as needed for follow-up, and add the new items under Related
Our sincere thanks to everyone who has contributed on this bug
tracker over the years. Thanks also for your understanding as we
make these adjustments and improvements for the future.
Please create a new report on
Developer Community or GitHub with
your current version information, steps to reproduce, and relevant error
messages or log files if you are hitting an issue that looks similar to
this resolved bug and you do not yet see a matching new report.
Created attachment 20453 [details]
screenshot from minimal example
Can be reproduced with Xamarin Forms 126.96.36.199 or 188.8.131.52-pre5
Can be reproduced in UWP.
See screenshot in attachments: grid.png
Each grid has green background to see what its height actually is.
Example A: Incorrect, Wrapped part of the text is not added to the grid height
Example B: Correct, there was only one change: first column width changed from Auto to 100
Example C: Incorrect, first column width changed from Auto to 10 (so, there is a difference between 100 and 10)
The incorrectly calculated height of course causes:
- incorrect positions of the elements placed after the grid
- incorrect calculations of the scrolled area height (if we want to scroll the grid, we cannot scroll to the very bottom)
An interesting thing is that the 3 examples differ in the definition of first column, not the second (the wrapped text is in the second column).
Minimal example: https://github.com/milan11/xamarin_forms_grid_test
Potentially similar bug: https://bugzilla.xamarin.com/show_bug.cgi?id=21844
Can you please test against the nightly (https://blog.xamarin.com/try-the-latest-in-xamarin-forms-with-nightly-builds/) and confirm that this is working for you? It appears to be fixed after updating.
I tried it with nightly 184.108.40.206-nightly and it works correctly (both the minimal example and our original application). Thank you.