Add hook for developers to play with profiler (unofficially)

Add hook for developers to play with profiler(unofficially)

r=rtenneti
BUG=107061
Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=114188

[jar (doing other things), 2011-12-12 23:53:49]

Raman,

Could you take a look at this?  It is just meant to be a helful macro.

Thanks,

Jim

[ramant (doing other things), 2011-12-13 00:02:54]

lgtm

http://codereview.chromium.org/8899016/diff/1/base/profiler/scoped_profile.h
File base/profiler/scoped_profile.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/8899016/diff/1/base/profiler/scoped_profile.h#...
base/profiler/scoped_profile.h:22: // It allows developers to do some profililng
of their code, and see results on
nit: profililng -> profiling

http://codereview.chromium.org/8899016/diff/1/base/profiler/scoped_profile.h#...
base/profiler/scoped_profile.h:39: #define
LINE_BASED_VARIABLE_NAME_FOR_PROFILING                                          
    \
nit: more than 80 chars

[ian fette, 2011-12-13 01:02:15]

lgtm with raman's whitespace nits

http://codereview.chromium.org/8899016/diff/1/base/profiler/scoped_profile.h
File base/profiler/scoped_profile.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/8899016/diff/1/base/profiler/scoped_profile.h#...
base/profiler/scoped_profile.h:19: #if defined(GOOGLE_CHROME_BUILD)
There seems to be active discussion around GOOGLE_CHROME_BUILD vs
OFFICIAL_BUILD. I think historically OFFICIAL_BUILD might have been correct here
but
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/group/chromium-dev/browse_thread/thr...
seems to be leaning the other way. I suspect this is probably now correct, but
just pointing that out.

[jar (doing other things), 2011-12-13 06:36:37]

Changes and respnoses to rtenneti and ian's comments.

http://codereview.chromium.org/8899016/diff/1/base/profiler/scoped_profile.h
File base/profiler/scoped_profile.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/8899016/diff/1/base/profiler/scoped_profile.h#...
base/profiler/scoped_profile.h:19: #if defined(GOOGLE_CHROME_BUILD)
It is hard to tell the outcome of the discussion you cited... but I copied the
flag used in browser_main to decide on UMA metrics setting.

I *think* the bug you cited leans towards using what I have... so I'll stay with
it.

On 2011/12/13 01:02:16, ian fette wrote:
> There seems to be active discussion around GOOGLE_CHROME_BUILD vs
> OFFICIAL_BUILD. I think historically OFFICIAL_BUILD might have been correct
here
> but
>
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/group/chromium-dev/browse_thread/thr...
> seems to be leaning the other way. I suspect this is probably now correct, but
> just pointing that out.

http://codereview.chromium.org/8899016/diff/1/base/profiler/scoped_profile.h#...
base/profiler/scoped_profile.h:22: // It allows developers to do some profililng
of their code, and see results on
On 2011/12/13 00:02:54, ramant wrote:
> nit: profililng -> profiling

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/8899016/diff/1/base/profiler/scoped_profile.h#...
base/profiler/scoped_profile.h:39: #define
LINE_BASED_VARIABLE_NAME_FOR_PROFILING                                          
    \
On 2011/12/13 00:02:54, ramant wrote:
> nit: more than 80 chars

Done.