Move RegisterContentSchemes from public url_constants into non-public url_schemes.

content/common/savable_url_schemes.h

Index: content/common/savable_url_schemes.h
diff --git a/content/common/savable_url_schemes.h b/content/common/savable_url_schemes.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..239a330c5b790eecb41b693fa59be32b1179cbc1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/content/common/savable_url_schemes.h
@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+// Copyright (c) 2012 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
+// Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
+// found in the LICENSE file.
+
+#ifndef CONTENT_COMMON_SAVABLE_URL_SCHEMES_H_
+#define CONTENT_COMMON_SAVABLE_URL_SCHEMES_H_
+#pragma once
+
+namespace content {
+
+namespace internal {

[jam, 2012/05/24 19:49:26]

nit: we don't use internal namespace in content

i meant put this function in content/common/url_schemes, no need to add
additional files

[jam, 2012/05/24 19:57:15]

just to be clear to save you any more round trips, I meant
content/common/url_schemes.cc has the g_savable_schemes. url_constants.cc's
GetSavableSchemes will call GetSavableSchemes in url_schemes.h

[grt (UTC plus 2), 2012/05/24 20:33:14]

That doesn't work since it brings back the original problem I'm trying to solve:
consumers of url_constants.obj will also get url_schemes.obj, which pulls in
content_client.obj and therefore all of WebKit and V8.  This is why I moved
g_savable_schemes into its own .obj file outside of public.  With the code the
way it is now, consumers of url_constants.obj will get savable_url_schemes.obj
and that's it.

Would you like me to get rid of namespace internal and rename these to
{G,S}etSavableSchemesInternal?  If not, what would be most fitting?

[jam, 2012/05/24 21:50:02]

got it
you can just get rid of the internal namespace and keep these the same as now
without an Internal suffix

[grt (UTC plus 2), 2012/05/25 03:15:04]

Apologies if I'm missing something obvious, but that will mean that the
definition of GetSavableSchemes in the (non-public) savable_url_schemes.cc will
correspond with the declaration in the (public) url_constants.h (and there will
be no definition in url_constants.cc).  Is that desired (is there a precedent
for this in content already)?  Or did I totally misinterpret your suggestion? 
Please have a look at patch set 4 and let me know what you think.

[jam, 2012/05/25 08:12:04]

ah, I was missing that there were two functions with the same name. you can call
the one in the content/common header GetSavableSchemesInternal then. please
declare it in the header

+
+// Null terminated list of schemes that are savable. This function can be
+// invoked on any thread.
+const char* const* GetSavableSchemes();
+
+// Intended for use only during initialization.
+void SetSavableSchemes(const char* const* savable_schemes);
+
+}  // namespace internal
+
+}  // namespace content
+
+#endif  // CONTENT_COMMON_SAVABLE_URL_SCHEMES_H_