In-class-initialize LIMITED_MEDIA_LOG log counters

In-class-initialize LIMITED_MEDIA_LOG log counters

Per previous code review comment [1]
this change updates callers of LIMITED_MEDIA_LOG to use in-class
initialization of the log counters. Opportunistic fixes to in-class
initialize (for simple values) other members are included for the
classes that use LIMITED_MEDIA_LOG.

[1]
https://codereview.chromium.org/1281113002/diff/80001/media/filters/source_buffer_stream.cc#newcode214

TEST=no regression

Committed: https://crrev.com/280ab986a1fbbfe7564b8cbea9570e54c9dd2ddf
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#343978}

[wolenetz, 2015-08-11 17:49:17]

Please take a look. Note, this CL depends on first landing
https://codereview.chromium.org/1281113002/.

Thanks!

[wolenetz, 2015-08-11 19:20:06]

The CQ bit was checked by wolenetz@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-11 19:20:13]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1278193003/1
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1278193003/1

[wolenetz, 2015-08-11 19:20:36]

On 2015/08/11 17:49:17, wolenetz wrote:
> Please take a look. Note, this CL depends on first landing
> https://codereview.chromium.org/1281113002/.
> 
> Thanks!

Prereq CL just landed. This CL is ready for review.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-11 20:58:23]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-11 20:58:24]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[wolenetz, 2015-08-11 21:25:24]

wolenetz@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ dalecurtis@chromium.org
- xhwang@chromium.org

[wolenetz, 2015-08-11 21:27:00]

Dale, xhwang@ is OOO. Can you review this please?

[DaleCurtis, 2015-08-11 23:05:13]

lgtm and passes the bots, but be aware of:

https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#chromium/src/base/compiler_spec...

[wolenetz, 2015-08-11 23:56:10]

On 2015/08/11 23:05:13, DaleCurtis wrote:
> lgtm and passes the bots, but be aware of:
> 
>
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#chromium/src/base/compiler_spec...

Thanks for pointing that out.
I've asked for guidance about this on chromium-dev:
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/chromium-dev/hDqJ4KBVqog

[wolenetz, 2015-08-17 20:33:10]

On 2015/08/11 23:56:10, wolenetz wrote:
> On 2015/08/11 23:05:13, DaleCurtis wrote:
> > lgtm and passes the bots, but be aware of:
> > 
> >
>
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#chromium/src/base/compiler_spec...
> 
> Thanks for pointing that out.
> I've asked for guidance about this on chromium-dev:
>
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/chromium-dev/hDqJ4KBVqog

Guidance was clear (after a bit of discussion on the thread): use (potentially
typed) enums instead of static const members for class-level constants, given
the risk of ODR-use causing undefined behavior if the definition / storage space
is missing. I've reverted *all* the patch set 1 conversions of enums to static
consts (including those that really are just in .cc in one case) to keep this CL
simple and scoped to just cleaning up some in-class initialization.

[wolenetz, 2015-08-17 20:35:22]

The CQ bit was checked by wolenetz@chromium.org

[wolenetz, 2015-08-17 20:35:22]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
dalecurtis@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1278193003/#ps20001
(title: "Nix the enum->const cleanup from this CL")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-17 20:35:38]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1278193003/20001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1278193003/20001

[DaleCurtis, 2015-08-17 20:50:41]

Thanks for sorting this out Matt!

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-17 23:11:34]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-17 23:11:34]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_chromium_rel_ng on tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[wolenetz, 2015-08-18 18:01:38]

The CQ bit was checked by wolenetz@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-18 18:01:57]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1278193003/20001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1278193003/20001

[wolenetz, 2015-08-18 18:20:40]

On 2015/08/17 20:33:10, wolenetz wrote:
> On 2015/08/11 23:56:10, wolenetz wrote:
> > On 2015/08/11 23:05:13, DaleCurtis wrote:
> > > lgtm and passes the bots, but be aware of:
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#chromium/src/base/compiler_spec...
> > 
> > Thanks for pointing that out.
> > I've asked for guidance about this on chromium-dev:
> >
>
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/chromium-dev/hDqJ4KBVqog
> 
> Guidance was clear (after a bit of discussion on the thread): use (potentially
> typed) enums instead of static const members for class-level constants, given
> the risk of ODR-use causing undefined behavior if the definition / storage
space
> is missing. I've reverted *all* the patch set 1 conversions of enums to static
> consts (including those that really are just in .cc in one case) to keep this
CL
> simple and scoped to just cleaning up some in-class initialization.

I emphasized a secondary point, not the primary reason for using (potentially
typed) enums instead of static const members for class-level constants. While
maybe there is some current risk of existing compiler not giving warning/error
on lack of definition/storage corresponding to the decl+initialization of a
static const member, this risk is estimated to be low. The primary reason is
essentially not to burden later maintainers with adding missing
storage/definition if it was left out of the original. Regardless, the guidance
was clear: use enums in this case. Sorry for spam/confusion.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-18 18:41:03]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-18 18:41:43]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/280ab986a1fbbfe7564b8cbea9570e54c9dd2ddf
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#343978}