Expand usage of platform-apps flag and permission features.

chrome/browser/extensions/extension_apitest.h

 // 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.
 
 #ifndef CHROME_BROWSER_EXTENSIONS_EXTENSION_APITEST_H_
 #define CHROME_BROWSER_EXTENSIONS_EXTENSION_APITEST_H_
 #pragma once
 
 #include <deque>
 #include <string>
@@ skipping 150 matching lines @@
                             int flags);
 
   // Hold details of the test, set in C++, which can be accessed by
   // javascript using chrome.test.getConfig().
   scoped_ptr<DictionaryValue> test_config_;
 
   // Hold the test WebSocket server.
   scoped_ptr<ui_test_utils::TestWebSocketServer> websocket_server_;
 };
 
+// PlatformAppApiTest sets up the command-line flags necessary for platform
+// apps (if any), and provides a convenience method for confirming that your
+// API requires those flags.
+class PlatformAppApiTest : public ExtensionApiTest {
+ public:
+  PlatformAppApiTest();
+  virtual ~PlatformAppApiTest();
+
+  virtual void SetUpCommandLine(CommandLine* command_line) OVERRIDE;
+
+ protected:
+  void VerifyPermissions(const FilePath& extension_path);

[jstritar, 2012/03/26 13:41:51]

Do these VerifyPermissions tests really get us much? Just wondering if it needs
to be in every platform api test.

[miket_OOO, 2012/03/26 15:19:57]

That's a fair point. It's a bit of a belt-and-suspenders approach, giving us
another opportunity to catch that someone forgot to declare the permissions if
they happen to copy/paste an existing apitest.cc to a new API. But it's a pretty
heavyweight way to do it. How about this multi-step approach instead:

1. I'll add a comment into each existing description of a platform-app API
reminding the author to take a look at the permissions model.

2. Then I'll refactor the usage of VerifyPermissions into a separate test that's
not associated with any particular API, so its purpose (making sure permissions
are enforced) is clear.

3. Finally, asargent and I will continue our quest to let authors declare
permissions in the IDL. Then most of this problem will go away, because anyone
writing a new API will have to choose which permissions are allowed.

[jstritar, 2012/03/27 15:16:09]

We could also override ExtensionBrowserTest::RunExtensionTestImpl to assert that
extension->is_platform_app()? (We'd have to change the signature or expose
another method so the PlatformAppApiTest has access to Extension*)

+
+ private:
+  CommandLine previous_command_line_;
+};
+
 #endif  // CHROME_BROWSER_EXTENSIONS_EXTENSION_APITEST_H_