Mandoline: Merge Surfaces and Views apps

components/view_manager/surfaces/surfaces_impl.h

 // Copyright 2014 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 COMPONENTS_VIEW_MANAGER_SURFACES_SURFACES_IMPL_H_
 #define COMPONENTS_VIEW_MANAGER_SURFACES_SURFACES_IMPL_H_
 
 #include "cc/surfaces/display_client.h"
 #include "cc/surfaces/surface_factory.h"
 #include "cc/surfaces/surface_factory_client.h"
 #include "components/view_manager/public/interfaces/command_buffer.mojom.h"
 #include "components/view_manager/public/interfaces/surfaces.mojom.h"
-#include "components/view_manager/public/interfaces/viewport_parameter_listener.mojom.h"
+#include "components/view_manager/surfaces/surfaces_state.h"
 #include "mojo/application/public/cpp/application_connection.h"
 #include "mojo/common/weak_binding_set.h"
 #include "third_party/mojo/src/mojo/public/cpp/bindings/strong_binding.h"
 
 namespace cc {
 class Display;
 }
 
 namespace mojo {
 class ApplicationManager;
 }
 
 namespace surfaces {
 class SurfacesScheduler;
-class SurfacesServiceApplication;
 
 class SurfacesImpl : public mojo::Surface, public cc::SurfaceFactoryClient {

[rjkroege, 2015/08/06 00:16:22]

This has a confusing name. Is it the SurfaceImplementation?

[Fady Samuel, 2015/08/06 16:48:23]

Very confusing name. I agree. Again I don't want to rename it here because it'll
confuse other changes I think.

[rjkroege, 2015/08/06 22:09:02]

but we will clean it up in future iterations over the code?

  public:
-  SurfacesImpl(SurfacesServiceApplication* application,
-               cc::SurfaceManager* manager,
-               uint32_t id_namespace,
-               SurfacesScheduler* scheduler,
+  SurfacesImpl(const scoped_refptr<SurfacesState>& state,
                mojo::InterfaceRequest<mojo::Surface> request);
 
   ~SurfacesImpl() override;
 
   // Surface implementation.
   void GetIdNamespace(const Surface::GetIdNamespaceCallback& callback) override;
   void SetResourceReturner(mojo::ResourceReturnerPtr returner) override;
   void CreateSurface(uint32_t local_id) override;
   void SubmitFrame(uint32_t local_id,

[rjkroege, 2015/08/06 00:16:21]

a mojo::FramePtr is a ptr to a CompositorFrame?

[Fady Samuel, 2015/08/06 16:48:23]

Yes, I hate the "FramePtr" name, but I don't want to change it here. Happy to
change it in a separate CL.

[rjkroege, 2015/08/06 22:09:02]

yes. +1.

                    mojo::FramePtr frame,
                    const mojo::Closure& callback) override;
   void DestroySurface(uint32_t local_id) override;
 
   // SurfaceFactoryClient implementation.
   void ReturnResources(const cc::ReturnedResourceArray& resources) override;
 
   cc::SurfaceFactory* factory() { return &factory_; }
 
  private:
   cc::SurfaceId QualifyIdentifier(uint32_t local_id);
 
-  SurfacesServiceApplication* application_;
-  cc::SurfaceManager* manager_;
+  scoped_refptr<SurfacesState> state_;
+  const uint32_t id_namespace_;

[rjkroege, 2015/08/06 00:16:22]

what is this? needs a comment

[Fady Samuel, 2015/08/06 16:48:23]

Done.

   cc::SurfaceFactory factory_;

[rjkroege, 2015/08/06 00:16:21]

Why inline and not a pointer? Is this class the Surface itself or the factory?
If a SurfaceImpl, the factory should be shared?

[Fady Samuel, 2015/08/06 16:48:23]

The problem is this abstraction is bad. SurfacesImpl is not a single Surface. It
is an entire namespace of Surfaces that can be generated by the process that
requested the service. This is a bad abstraction and I want to get rid of
it....in a separate CL :P

[rjkroege, 2015/08/06 22:09:02]

ok

-  const uint32_t id_namespace_;
-  SurfacesScheduler* scheduler_;
   mojo::ScopedMessagePipeHandle command_buffer_handle_;
   mojo::ResourceReturnerPtr returner_;
   mojo::StrongBinding<Surface> binding_;
 
   DISALLOW_COPY_AND_ASSIGN(SurfacesImpl);
 };
 
 }  // namespace surfaces
 
 #endif  // COMPONENTS_VIEW_MANAGER_SURFACES_SURFACES_IMPL_H_