Remove WTF and WebCore from cc/ and webkit/compositor_bindings/

Remove WTF and WebCore from cc/ and webkit/compositor_bindings/

Ding, dong...

BUG=154451
Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=167071

[danakj, 2012-11-10 01:04:20]

\o/

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/cc.gypi
File cc/cc.gypi (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/cc.gypi#newcode25
cc/cc.gypi:25: '<(webkit_src_dir)/Source/WebCore/platform/animation',
Should all these go too?

[tfarina, 2012-11-10 01:06:13]

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/cc.gypi
File cc/cc.gypi (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/cc.gypi#newcode25
cc/cc.gypi:25: '<(webkit_src_dir)/Source/WebCore/platform/animation',
On 2012/11/10 01:04:20, danakj wrote:
> Should all these go too?
aren't these used yet through #include <public/Foo.h> ?

[piman, 2012-11-10 01:08:18]

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/cc.gypi
File cc/cc.gypi (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/cc.gypi#newcode25
cc/cc.gypi:25: '<(webkit_src_dir)/Source/WebCore/platform/animation',
On 2012/11/10 01:04:20, danakj wrote:
> Should all these go too?

Maybe? I don't know why they're still here. I can do that as a follow up, since
that mostly concerns a different set of bots that I don't think I can send a try
job to, and wouldn't want to get this huge change to be reverted because of
this.

[jamesr, 2012-11-10 01:12:18]

Few small things then LGTM

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/resource_provider.cc
File cc/resource_provider.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/resource_provider.cc#newco...
cc/resource_provider.cc:154: NOTREACHED();
NOTREACHED() is a DCHECK(), CRASH() is a, well, CRASH().  Don't think we want to
change this behavior as part of this patch.

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/software_renderer.cc
File cc/software_renderer.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/software_renderer.cc#newco...
cc/software_renderer.cc:169: NOTREACHED();
same here. CHECK(false) would have the same semantics as CRASH()

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/stubs/config.h
File cc/stubs/config.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/stubs/config.h#newcode11
cc/stubs/config.h:11: #if INSIDE_WEBKIT_BUILD
just delete this file

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/test/fake_content_layer_cl...
File cc/test/fake_content_layer_client.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/test/fake_content_layer_cl...
cc/test/fake_content_layer_client.h:5: #include "base/compiler_specific.h"
how's this used here?

[tfarina, 2012-11-10 01:13:43]

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/test/fake_content_layer_cl...
File cc/test/fake_content_layer_client.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/test/fake_content_layer_cl...
cc/test/fake_content_layer_client.h:5: #include "base/compiler_specific.h"
On 2012/11/10 01:12:18, jamesr wrote:
> how's this used here?

I think it was for OVERRIDE macro.

[piman, 2012-11-10 01:28:36]

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/resource_provider.cc
File cc/resource_provider.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/resource_provider.cc#newco...
cc/resource_provider.cc:154: NOTREACHED();
On 2012/11/10 01:12:18, jamesr wrote:
> NOTREACHED() is a DCHECK(), CRASH() is a, well, CRASH().  Don't think we want
to
> change this behavior as part of this patch.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/software_renderer.cc
File cc/software_renderer.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/software_renderer.cc#newco...
cc/software_renderer.cc:169: NOTREACHED();
On 2012/11/10 01:12:18, jamesr wrote:
> same here. CHECK(false) would have the same semantics as CRASH()

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/stubs/config.h
File cc/stubs/config.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/stubs/config.h#newcode11
cc/stubs/config.h:11: #if INSIDE_WEBKIT_BUILD
On 2012/11/10 01:12:18, jamesr wrote:
> just delete this file

Doh, I meant to. Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/test/fake_content_layer_cl...
File cc/test/fake_content_layer_client.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11410021/diff/1/cc/test/fake_content_layer_cl...
cc/test/fake_content_layer_client.h:5: #include "base/compiler_specific.h"
On 2012/11/10 01:13:43, tfarina wrote:
> On 2012/11/10 01:12:18, jamesr wrote:
> > how's this used here?
> 
> I think it was for OVERRIDE macro.

Yep.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-11-10 01:28:55]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/piman@chromium.org/11410021/4014

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-11-10 02:36:22]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/piman@chromium.org/11410021/202

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-11-10 03:00:51]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/piman@chromium.org/11410021/8003

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-11-10 06:31:02]

Change committed as 167071