ui: Move overriddes of UITestSuite to private section.

ui: Move overriddes of UITestSuite to private section.

TBR=sky@chromium.org

[tfarina, 2012-09-05 03:13:50]

TBRing...

[sky, 2012-09-05 04:04:32]

Since the members in the base class are protected I can't find a compelling
reason to do this.

[tfarina, 2012-09-05 04:07:04]

On Wednesday, September 5, 2012, wrote:

> Since the members in the base class are protected I can't find a compelling
> reason to do this.
>
> Consistency with app_list_test_suite.h, compositor/test/test_suite.h.


>
http://codereview.chromium.**org/10914090/<http://codereview.chromium.org/109...
>


-- 
Thiago

[sky, 2012-09-05 04:12:54]

The first one I landed on when grepping was base/test/perf_test_suite.h

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 9:07 PM, Thiago Farina <tfarina@chromium.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Wednesday, September 5, 2012, wrote:
>>
>> Since the members in the base class are protected I can't find a
>> compelling
>> reason to do this.
>>
> Consistency with app_list_test_suite.h, compositor/test/test_suite.h.
>
>>
>> http://codereview.chromium.org/10914090/
>
>
>
> --
> Thiago

[tfarina, 2012-09-05 04:16:46]

On Wednesday, September 5, 2012, Scott Violet wrote:

> The first one I landed on when grepping was base/test/perf_test_suite.h
>
> Can you open an exception and let me keep ui in sintony? This
perf_test_suite.h is even public. I think we should keep overrides private
if we can.

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 9:07 PM, Thiago Farina
<tfarina@chromium.org<javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wednesday, September 5, 2012, wrote:
> >>
> >> Since the members in the base class are protected I can't find a
> >> compelling
> >> reason to do this.
> >>
> > Consistency with app_list_test_suite.h, compositor/test/test_suite.h.
> >
> >>
> >> http://codereview.chromium.org/10914090/
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thiago
>


-- 
Thiago

[sky, 2012-09-05 13:52:52]

I agree with you if implementing a pure virtual interface, but when subclassing
a non-pure virtual interface I prefer to keep them in the same section as in the
superclass. So, if we're going for consistency I would rather see protected
every where.

[tfarina, 2012-09-05 13:56:32]

On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 10:52 AM,  <sky@chromium.org> wrote:
> I agree with you if implementing a pure virtual interface, but when
> subclassing
> a non-pure virtual interface I prefer to keep them in the same section as in
> the
> superclass.
OK, this is another way to see it. And I can understand you. I'll
change the others to match with this.

> So, if we're going for consistency I would rather see protected
> every where.
>
CL coming...

Thanks,

> http://codereview.chromium.org/10914090/



-- 
Thiago