rename utility to see if a paint will overwrite its pixels

rename utility to see if a paint will overwrite its pixels

BUG=skia:

Committed: https://skia.googlesource.com/skia/+/af51e04dc0978d7a93f12ee7588f5af9336c1fcc

[reed1, 2015-07-15 15:16:48]

The CQ bit was checked by reed@google.com to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-07-15 15:16:59]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1228853005/1

[reed1, 2015-07-15 15:19:25]

reed@google.com changed reviewers:
+ junov@google.com, robertphillips@google.com

[reed1, 2015-07-15 15:19:26]

ptal

motivated to clarify this in preparation for
https://codereview.chromium.org/1236023004/

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-07-15 15:27:42]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-07-15 15:27:43]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[robertphillips, 2015-07-15 15:53:51]

lgtm + questions/suggestions

https://codereview.chromium.org/1228853005/diff/1/src/core/SkPaintPriv.cpp
File src/core/SkPaintPriv.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1228853005/diff/1/src/core/SkPaintPriv.cpp#ne...
src/core/SkPaintPriv.cpp:32: if (0xff == paintAlpha &&
Can this go on the prior line ?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1228853005/diff/1/src/core/SkPaintPriv.h
File src/core/SkPaintPriv.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1228853005/diff/1/src/core/SkPaintPriv.h#newc...
src/core/SkPaintPriv.h:21: kOpaque_ShaderOverrideOpacity,      //!< the
overriding shader is opaque
kNotOpaque -> kUnknownOpacity ?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1228853005/diff/1/src/core/SkPaintPriv.h#newc...
src/core/SkPaintPriv.h:25: /**
space between 'with' and 'this' ?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1228853005/diff/1/src/core/SkPaintPriv.h#newc...
src/core/SkPaintPriv.h:26: *  Returns true if drawing  withthis paint (or NULL)
will ovewrite all affected pixels.
// The 'overrideOpacity' parameter allows the caller to ...
?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1228853005/diff/1/src/core/SkPaintPriv.h#newc...
src/core/SkPaintPriv.h:43: */
Why not a 'const SkImage&' ?
I looks like the image parameter is not optional.

[reed1, 2015-07-15 18:03:03]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1228853005/diff/1/src/core/SkPaintPriv.cpp
File src/core/SkPaintPriv.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1228853005/diff/1/src/core/SkPaintPriv.cpp#ne...
src/core/SkPaintPriv.cpp:32: if (0xff == paintAlpha &&
On 2015/07/15 15:53:51, robertphillips wrote:
> Can this go on the prior line ?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1228853005/diff/1/src/core/SkPaintPriv.h
File src/core/SkPaintPriv.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1228853005/diff/1/src/core/SkPaintPriv.h#newc...
src/core/SkPaintPriv.h:21: kOpaque_ShaderOverrideOpacity,      //!< the
overriding shader is opaque
On 2015/07/15 15:53:51, robertphillips wrote:
> kNotOpaque -> kUnknownOpacity ?

Hmm, I deliberately changed that 'cause it felt confusing when I read the impls.
Is not-opaque confusing?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1228853005/diff/1/src/core/SkPaintPriv.h#newc...
src/core/SkPaintPriv.h:25: /**
On 2015/07/15 15:53:51, robertphillips wrote:
> space between 'with' and 'this' ?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1228853005/diff/1/src/core/SkPaintPriv.h#newc...
src/core/SkPaintPriv.h:26: *  Returns true if drawing  withthis paint (or NULL)
will ovewrite all affected pixels.
On 2015/07/15 15:53:51, robertphillips wrote:
> // The 'overrideOpacity' parameter allows the caller to ...
> ?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1228853005/diff/1/src/core/SkPaintPriv.h#newc...
src/core/SkPaintPriv.h:43: */
On 2015/07/15 15:53:51, robertphillips wrote:
> Why not a 'const SkImage&' ?
> I looks like the image parameter is not optional.

True, but this is consistent with all the rest of skia, which doesn't take & for
ref-counted objects (see pictures, shaders, etc.) even when they are required.

[reed1, 2015-07-15 18:03:11]

The CQ bit was checked by reed@google.com to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-07-15 18:03:26]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1228853005/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-07-15 18:56:55]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-07-15 18:56:55]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[reed1, 2015-07-15 20:41:35]

The CQ bit was checked by reed@google.com

[reed1, 2015-07-15 20:41:36]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
robertphillips@google.com
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1228853005/#ps20001
(title: " ")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-07-15 20:41:51]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1228853005/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-07-15 20:42:39]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001) as
https://skia.googlesource.com/skia/+/af51e04dc0978d7a93f12ee7588f5af9336c1fcc

[Justin Novosad, 2015-07-15 20:51:48]

On 2015/07/15 20:42:39, commit-bot: I haz the power wrote:
> Committed patchset #2 (id:20001) as
> https://skia.googlesource.com/skia/+/af51e04dc0978d7a93f12ee7588f5af9336c1fcc

lgtm2