Move the windows-specific scoped_* stuff from base to base/win and in the bas...

Move the windows-specific scoped_* stuff from base to base/win and in the base::win namespace.

This keeps old headers that forward to the new versions and have using declarations that allow the existing code to compile. I fixed all the callers in base to use the new ones, and also the other files I happened to touch.

This splits out the stuff from scoped_handle into a few separate files. I just deleted ScopedFindFile since it was only used in one place and it wasn't even really helping there.

I removed StackBstr which was a #define and used the "regular" ScopedBstr in the 7 places that used it. This is an optimization to avoid an extra allocation, but none of the callers are remotely performance critical.

TEST=it compiles
BUG=none

Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=62843

[brettw, 2010-10-15 03:09:40]

I'm thinking this might be a good template for future moves.

[darin (slow to review), 2010-10-15 05:58:11]

http://codereview.chromium.org/3781009/diff/25001/26018
File base/win/scoped_comptr.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/3781009/diff/25001/26018#newcode25
base/win/scoped_comptr.h:25: template <class Interface>
this does not need the template prefix since it is an inner class now and it can
just pick up Interface from ScopedComPtr.

http://codereview.chromium.org/3781009/diff/25001/26027
File chrome/installer/util/wmi.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/3781009/diff/25001/26027#newcode118
chrome/installer/util/wmi.cc:118: base::win::ScopedComPtr<IWbemClassObject>
process_create;
the base::win:: is actually a bit obnoxious in windows specific files.  when i'm
in such a source file, or within an OS_WIN define, i would never use
base::(other_platform)::, so why do i need to say base::win::?  maybe the "win"
namespace is not so helpful?

[brettw, 2010-10-15 06:47:03]

On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 10:58 PM,  <darin@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/3781009/diff/25001/26018
> File base/win/scoped_comptr.h (right):
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/3781009/diff/25001/26018#newcode25
> base/win/scoped_comptr.h:25: template <class Interface>
> this does not need the template prefix since it is an inner class now
> and it can just pick up Interface from ScopedComPtr.
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/3781009/diff/25001/26027
> File chrome/installer/util/wmi.cc (right):
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/3781009/diff/25001/26027#newcode118
> chrome/installer/util/wmi.cc:118:
> base::win::ScopedComPtr<IWbemClassObject> process_create;
> the base::win:: is actually a bit obnoxious in windows specific files.
> when i'm in such a source file, or within an OS_WIN define, i would
> never use base::(other_platform)::, so why do i need to say base::win::?
>  maybe the "win" namespace is not so helpful?

I agree in this case it's a bit redundant. On the other hand
ScopedHandle is really much better with win on it, especially since
there's *another* ScopedHandle in base (for stdio-type handles). I
don't have a better answer other than to be consistent.

Brett

[darin (slow to review), 2010-10-15 07:08:16]

On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 11:46 PM, Brett Wilson <brettw@chromium.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 10:58 PM,  <darin@chromium.org> wrote:
> >
> > http://codereview.chromium.org/3781009/diff/25001/26018
> > File base/win/scoped_comptr.h (right):
> >
> > http://codereview.chromium.org/3781009/diff/25001/26018#newcode25
> > base/win/scoped_comptr.h:25: template <class Interface>
> > this does not need the template prefix since it is an inner class now
> > and it can just pick up Interface from ScopedComPtr.
> >
> > http://codereview.chromium.org/3781009/diff/25001/26027
> > File chrome/installer/util/wmi.cc (right):
> >
> > http://codereview.chromium.org/3781009/diff/25001/26027#newcode118
> > chrome/installer/util/wmi.cc:118:
> > base::win::ScopedComPtr<IWbemClassObject> process_create;
> > the base::win:: is actually a bit obnoxious in windows specific files.
> > when i'm in such a source file, or within an OS_WIN define, i would
> > never use base::(other_platform)::, so why do i need to say base::win::?
> >  maybe the "win" namespace is not so helpful?
>
> I agree in this case it's a bit redundant. On the other hand
> ScopedHandle is really much better with win on it, especially since
> there's *another* ScopedHandle in base (for stdio-type handles). I
> don't have a better answer other than to be consistent.
>
> Brett
>


OK (LGTM w/ the other one nit fixed)

-Darin