Initial Managed Mode extension API, supporting querying the setting and a stub for enabling the mod…

chrome/browser/extensions/extension_managed_mode_api.h

Index: chrome/browser/extensions/extension_managed_mode_api.h
===================================================================
--- chrome/browser/extensions/extension_managed_mode_api.h	(revision 0)
+++ chrome/browser/extensions/extension_managed_mode_api.h	(revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+// 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.
+
+// Defines the Chrome Extensions Managed Mode API relevant classes to realize
+// the API as specified in the extension API JSON.
+
+#ifndef CHROME_BROWSER_EXTENSIONS_EXTENSION_MANAGED_MODE_API_H_
+#define CHROME_BROWSER_EXTENSIONS_EXTENSION_MANAGED_MODE_API_H_
+#pragma once
+
+#include "chrome/browser/extensions/extension_function.h"
+#include "chrome/browser/extensions/extension_preference_api.h"
+
+class GetManagedModeFunction : public PreferenceFunction {
+ public:
+  virtual ~GetManagedModeFunction();

[Bernhard Bauer, 2012/03/01 16:32:14]

I don't think you need to declare the destructor again.

[Pam (message me for reviews), 2012/03/01 20:47:34]

Sorry, I don't understand this comment. "Again"? Where is it already declared?

[Bernhard Bauer, 2012/03/02 09:23:58]

In the base class. IIUC, this is only necessary if you define additional
non-trivial members in the subclass, as that will cause a non-trivial destructor
to be synthesized by the compiler if you don't declare one yourself.

[Pam (message me for reviews), 2012/03/02 12:39:36]

I believe that's correct, but unless you feel strongly, I prefer to include it.
It protects against leaks in case someone makes the subclass more complicated
and doesn't notice the lack of a virtual ctor. And it shouldn't cost much; we're
already paying the space penalty because of the virtual RunImpl().

WDYT?

[Bernhard Bauer, 2012/03/02 13:31:09]

I don't feel strongly about it. Putting on my smartass hat, I just want to point
out that even if someone would add members to the subclass, it wouldn't cause a
leak, because the compiler would still synthesize a destructor.

+  virtual bool RunImpl() OVERRIDE;
+  DECLARE_EXTENSION_FUNCTION_NAME("experimental.managedMode.get")
+};
+
+class EnableManagedModeFunction : public PreferenceFunction {
+ public:
+  virtual ~EnableManagedModeFunction();
+  virtual bool RunImpl() OVERRIDE;
+  DECLARE_EXTENSION_FUNCTION_NAME("experimental.managedMode.enable")
+};
+
+#endif  // CHROME_BROWSER_EXTENSIONS_EXTENSION_MANAGED_MODE_API_H_
Property changes on: chrome\browser\extensions\extension_managed_mode_api.h
___________________________________________________________________
Added: svn:eol-style
   + LF