Add a referrer class to be used in the browser process whenever passing around referrsr

content/browser/tab_contents/referrer.h

+// Copyright (c) 2011 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_BROWSER_TAB_CONTENTS_REFERRER_H_
+#define CONTENT_BROWSER_TAB_CONTENTS_REFERRER_H_
+#pragma once
+
+#include <iosfwd>
+
+#include "base/basictypes.h"
+#include "content/common/content_export.h"
+#include "googleurl/src/gurl.h"
+#include "third_party/WebKit/Source/WebKit/chromium/public/WebReferrerPolicy.h"
+
+namespace content {
+
+// This class holds a referrer URL, as well as the referrer policy to be
+// applied to this URL. When passing around referrers in the browser process,
+// that will eventually end up being used for URL requests, always use this
+// class.
+class CONTENT_EXPORT Referrer {
+ public:
+  Referrer(const GURL& referrer, WebKit::WebReferrerPolicy referrer_policy);
+  Referrer();
+
+  const GURL& url() const { return url_; }
+  WebKit::WebReferrerPolicy policy() const { return policy_; }
+
+ private:
+  GURL url_;
+  WebKit::WebReferrerPolicy policy_;
+};
+
+// Stream operator so Referrer can be used in assertion statements.
+CONTENT_EXPORT std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& out,

[brettw, 2011/11/22 21:14:01]

We don't usually write these. Is it really necessary?

I guess I was expecting this to be in content/common and be sent over IPC where
we have GURLs sent as the referrer today. Is that undesirable for some reason?

[jochen (gone - plz use gerrit), 2011/11/22 21:26:07]

Done.

+                                        const Referrer& referrer);
+
+}  // namespace content
+
+#endif  // CONTENT_BROWSER_TAB_CONTENTS_REFERRER_H_