Make all methods on WebLayerTreeView optional.

Make all methods on WebLayerTreeView optional.

This should make creating a subclass in a test easier, and hopefully
combined with FrameTestHelpers::WebViewHelper and some cleverness will
allow writing FOUC tests.

BUG=521692
Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=200865

[esprehn, 2015-08-19 23:37:58]

esprehn@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ dglazkov@chromium.org, ojan@chromium.org, pdr@chromium.org

[esprehn, 2015-08-19 23:38:47]

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

[pdr., 2015-08-19 23:46:02]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1287403005/diff/1/Source/web/tests/WebFrameTe...
File Source/web/tests/WebFrameTest.cpp (left):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1287403005/diff/1/Source/web/tests/WebFrameTe...
Source/web/tests/WebFrameTest.cpp:4530: void setRootLayer(const WebLayer&) 
override { }
Can't you just copy this code in your test? I like pure virtual (or, almost
pure) because it prevents mistakes in real subclasses.

[esprehn, 2015-08-19 23:48:55]

On 2015/08/19 at 23:46:02, pdr wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/1287403005/diff/1/Source/web/tests/WebFrameTe...
> File Source/web/tests/WebFrameTest.cpp (left):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/1287403005/diff/1/Source/web/tests/WebFrameTe...
> Source/web/tests/WebFrameTest.cpp:4530: void setRootLayer(const WebLayer&) 
override { }
> Can't you just copy this code in your test? I like pure virtual (or, almost
pure) because it prevents mistakes in real subclasses.

It's a ton of copy pasta, and pure virtual is painful across the chromium
boundary where these classes are implemented. Most of the methods are already
not pure, having a random set of them be pure is bad.

[pdr., 2015-08-19 23:54:51]

On 2015/08/19 at 23:48:55, esprehn wrote:
> On 2015/08/19 at 23:46:02, pdr wrote:
> >
https://codereview.chromium.org/1287403005/diff/1/Source/web/tests/WebFrameTe...
> > File Source/web/tests/WebFrameTest.cpp (left):
> > 
> >
https://codereview.chromium.org/1287403005/diff/1/Source/web/tests/WebFrameTe...
> > Source/web/tests/WebFrameTest.cpp:4530: void setRootLayer(const WebLayer&) 
override { }
> > Can't you just copy this code in your test? I like pure virtual (or, almost
pure) because it prevents mistakes in real subclasses.
> 
> It's a ton of copy pasta, and pure virtual is painful across the chromium
boundary where these classes are implemented. Most of the methods are already
not pure, having a random set of them be pure is bad.

Sounds reasonable enough.

LGTM

[esprehn, 2015-08-19 23:55:46]

On 2015/08/19 at 23:48:55, esprehn wrote:
> On 2015/08/19 at 23:46:02, pdr wrote:
> >
https://codereview.chromium.org/1287403005/diff/1/Source/web/tests/WebFrameTe...
> > File Source/web/tests/WebFrameTest.cpp (left):
> > 
> >
https://codereview.chromium.org/1287403005/diff/1/Source/web/tests/WebFrameTe...
> > Source/web/tests/WebFrameTest.cpp:4530: void setRootLayer(const WebLayer&) 
override { }
> > Can't you just copy this code in your test? I like pure virtual (or, almost
pure) because it prevents mistakes in real subclasses.
> 
> It's a ton of copy pasta, and pure virtual is painful across the chromium
boundary where these classes are implemented. Most of the methods are already
not pure, having a random set of them be pure is bad.

Note that we use this pattern for most of the "implemented in chromium" classes:
WebWidget, WebViewClient, WebFrameClient, WebFrameWidget, WebURLLoaderClient,
WebCompositorSupport.

[esprehn, 2015-08-19 23:56:20]

The CQ bit was unchecked by esprehn@chromium.org

[esprehn, 2015-08-19 23:56:21]

The CQ bit was checked by esprehn@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-20 00:00:56]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1287403005/1
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1287403005/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-20 00:52:42]

Committed patchset #1 (id:1) as
https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=200865