Move pub/barback's Pool class into its own package.

Move pub/barback's Pool class into its own package.

R=rnystrom@google.com

Committed: https://code.google.com/p/dart/source/detail?r=38525

[Bob Nystrom, 2014-07-17 22:09:14]

https://codereview.chromium.org/399963004/diff/1/pkg/barback/lib/src/utils/fi...
File pkg/barback/lib/src/utils/file_pool.dart (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/399963004/diff/1/pkg/barback/lib/src/utils/fi...
pkg/barback/lib/src/utils/file_pool.dart:11: import 'package:pool/pool.dart';
How about giving this a bit more specific name. Maybe "resource_pool"?

https://codereview.chromium.org/399963004/diff/1/pkg/pool/README.md
File pkg/pool/README.md (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/399963004/diff/1/pkg/pool/README.md#newcode14
pkg/pool/README.md:14: // Since the call to [File.readAsString] is within
[withResource], no more
This example would be clearer if you did something like a loop over a thousand
files.

[nweiz, 2014-07-17 22:56:55]

https://codereview.chromium.org/399963004/diff/1/pkg/barback/lib/src/utils/fi...
File pkg/barback/lib/src/utils/file_pool.dart (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/399963004/diff/1/pkg/barback/lib/src/utils/fi...
pkg/barback/lib/src/utils/file_pool.dart:11: import 'package:pool/pool.dart';
On 2014/07/17 22:09:14, Bob Nystrom wrote:
> How about giving this a bit more specific name. Maybe "resource_pool"?

I can if you want, but I think in a programming context it's reasonably clear
that "pool" refers to resources. It doesn't seem worthwhile to make people type
longer names when using the package if it's not disambiguating between things
they're likely to mix up.

Also I don't really like the idea of juxtaposing "ResourcePool" and
"PoolResource" classes.

https://codereview.chromium.org/399963004/diff/1/pkg/pool/README.md
File pkg/pool/README.md (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/399963004/diff/1/pkg/pool/README.md#newcode14
pkg/pool/README.md:14: // Since the call to [File.readAsString] is within
[withResource], no more
On 2014/07/17 22:09:14, Bob Nystrom wrote:
> This example would be clearer if you did something like a loop over a thousand
> files.

I'm not sure how I'd do that without adding a lot of extra text here. I'd want
the example to do something with the extra files, but something like copying
them to another location means I'd have to have a writeFile function that's also
constrained by the pool and at that point the example starts getting very large.
I really like keeping inline examples concise.

[Bob Nystrom, 2014-07-21 17:47:36]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/399963004/diff/1/pkg/barback/lib/src/utils/fi...
File pkg/barback/lib/src/utils/file_pool.dart (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/399963004/diff/1/pkg/barback/lib/src/utils/fi...
pkg/barback/lib/src/utils/file_pool.dart:11: import 'package:pool/pool.dart';
On 2014/07/17 22:56:55, nweiz wrote:
> On 2014/07/17 22:09:14, Bob Nystrom wrote:
> > How about giving this a bit more specific name. Maybe "resource_pool"?
> 
> I can if you want, but I think in a programming context it's reasonably clear
> that "pool" refers to resources.

Maybe it's just my background, but I'd actually expect it to be an object or
memory pool.

> It doesn't seem worthwhile to make people type
> longer names when using the package if it's not disambiguating between things
> they're likely to mix up.
> 
> Also I don't really like the idea of juxtaposing "ResourcePool" and
> "PoolResource" classes.

Yeah, that would be weird. Just "pool" SGTM I guess.

[nweiz, 2014-07-23 23:32:13]

Committed patchset #1 manually as r38525 (presubmit successful).