cc: Switch time_source.h and timing_function* to Chrome coding style.

cc: Switch time_source.h and timing_function* to Chrome coding style.

BUG=144576, 144577
TEST=cc_unittests
R=jamesr@chromium.org

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=168302

[jamesr, 2012-11-16 00:31:54]

I think vollick@'s a better reviewer for the timing_function* changes - mind
taking a look at that, Ian?

[danakj, 2012-11-16 00:32:12]

http://codereview.chromium.org/11411024/diff/1/cc/timing_function.cc
File cc/timing_function.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/11411024/diff/1/cc/timing_function.cc#newcode37
cc/timing_function.cc:37: SkScalar SkUnitCubicInterp(SkScalar bx, SkScalar by,
I thought you have to put 1 parameter per line if they don't all fine on one
line? (not that i'm a fan)

[tfarina, 2012-11-16 00:36:35]

http://codereview.chromium.org/11411024/diff/1/cc/timing_function.cc
File cc/timing_function.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/11411024/diff/1/cc/timing_function.cc#newcode37
cc/timing_function.cc:37: SkScalar SkUnitCubicInterp(SkScalar bx, SkScalar by,
On 2012/11/16 00:32:13, danakj wrote:
> I thought you have to put 1 parameter per line if they don't all fine on one
> line? (not that i'm a fan)

this is a pair of x, y. Yes, I have thought about writing one arg per line. But
I think it makes more sense when it's like this, i.e, the types are related.

Otherwise, I would have written one arg per line.

I can wrap one per line if you are strong about this.

[danakj, 2012-11-16 00:38:21]

http://codereview.chromium.org/11411024/diff/1/cc/timing_function.cc
File cc/timing_function.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/11411024/diff/1/cc/timing_function.cc#newcode37
cc/timing_function.cc:37: SkScalar SkUnitCubicInterp(SkScalar bx, SkScalar by,
On 2012/11/16 00:36:35, tfarina wrote:
> On 2012/11/16 00:32:13, danakj wrote:
> > I thought you have to put 1 parameter per line if they don't all fine on one
> > line? (not that i'm a fan)
> 
> this is a pair of x, y. Yes, I have thought about writing one arg per line.
But
> I think it makes more sense when it's like this, i.e, the types are related.
> 
> Otherwise, I would have written one arg per line.
> 
> I can wrap one per line if you are strong about this.

No, the less line wrapping the better IMO

[tfarina, 2012-11-16 17:04:09]

Ian, ping?!

[tfarina, 2012-11-16 18:56:43]

Hi Adrienne, could you approve this change?

I'm certainly one of you can review this.

Ian, might be busy right now.

[Ian Vollick, 2012-11-16 19:03:38]

On 2012/11/16 18:56:43, tfarina wrote:
> Hi Adrienne, could you approve this change?
> 
> I'm certainly one of you can review this.
> 
> Ian, might be busy right now.
LGTM. Sorry for the delay.

[enne (OOO), 2012-11-16 19:03:41]

Sorry, I'm busy.  Style changes are not so important that they can't wait for
the right person to look at them.  Please be patient.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-11-16 19:24:16]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/tfarina@chromium.org/11411024/1