Revert of Prepare for multiple !important author ranges.

Revert of Prepare for multiple !important author ranges. (patchset #11 id:200001 of https://codereview.chromium.org/1282243002/ )

Reason for revert:
This caused oilpan plugin errors on Windows.
From http://build.chromium.org/p/chromium.fyi/builders/ClangToTWin/builds/2535/steps/compile/logs/stdio:

..\..\third_party\WebKit\Source\core/css/resolver/MatchResult.h(115,1) :  error: [blink-gc] Class 'ImportantAuthorRangeIterator' contains invalid fields.
class ImportantAuthorRangeIterator {
^
..\..\third_party\WebKit\Source\core/css/resolver/MatchResult.h(140,5) :  note: [blink-gc] Stack-allocated field 'm_result' declared here:
    const MatchResult& m_result;
    ^
..\..\third_party\WebKit\Source\core/css/resolver/MatchResult.h(144,1) :  error: [blink-gc] Class 'ImportantAuthorRanges' contains invalid fields.
class ImportantAuthorRanges {
^
..\..\third_party\WebKit\Source\core/css/resolver/MatchResult.h(152,5) :  note: [blink-gc] Stack-allocated field 'm_result' declared here:
    const MatchResult& m_result;
    ^

Original issue's description:
> Prepare for multiple !important author ranges.
> 
> This CL is split out from [1] where we support multiple author origins in
> terms of shadow dom scopes. The vector of MatchedProperties contains
> matched declarations from all origins in the order in which they should
> be applied. For !important declarations, they are applied in the same
> order within the same origin, but the order of the origins are different
> as the cascading order is:
> 
>   - UA important
>   - Author important
>   - Author
>   - UA
> 
> We used to have two ranges, one for UA and one for author to accomplish
> this. However, with the normal/!important cascading order for
> declarations from different shadow doms, we need multiple author ranges:
> 
>   - UA important
>   - Author important scope n
>   ...
>   - Author important scope 1
>   - Author scope 1
>   ...
>   - Author scope n
>   - UA
> 
> We introduce an ImportantAuthorRangeIterator to iterate through the
> author ranges and add iterator-style iteration for each range through the
> MatchedPropertiesRange class.
> 
> As the applyMatchedProperties code is hot, I've run the blink_perf.css
> tests locally. Some improved by 2-4%, some became worse by similar
> percentages.
> 
> [1] https://codereview.chromium.org/1224673002/
> 
> BUG=487125
> TEST=fast/css
> 
> Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=200697

TBR=kochi@chromium.org,timloh@chromium.org,rune@opera.com
NOPRESUBMIT=true
NOTREECHECKS=true
NOTRY=true
BUG=487125
Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=200728

[hans, 2015-08-18 14:58:31]

Created Revert of Prepare for multiple !important author ranges.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-18 14:58:40]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1303513002/1
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1303513002/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-18 14:59:05]

Committed patchset #1 (id:1) as
https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=200728

[Timothy Loh, 2015-08-19 01:41:46]

On 2015/08/18 14:59:05, commit-bot: I haz the power wrote:
> Committed patchset #1 (id:1) as
> https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=200728

Don't we normally not revert for Oilpan breakages?

[kochi, 2015-08-19 01:51:02]

On 2015/08/19 01:41:46, Timothy Loh wrote:
> On 2015/08/18 14:59:05, commit-bot: I haz the power wrote:
> > Committed patchset #1 (id:1) as
> > https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=200728
> 
> Don't we normally not revert for Oilpan breakages?

Yeah, I thought the same.
What's the expected fix for Oilpan?

[rune, 2015-08-19 07:15:56]

On 2015/08/19 01:51:02, Takayoshi Kochi wrote:
> On 2015/08/19 01:41:46, Timothy Loh wrote:
> > On 2015/08/18 14:59:05, commit-bot: I haz the power wrote:
> > > Committed patchset #1 (id:1) as
> > > https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=200728
> > 
> > Don't we normally not revert for Oilpan breakages?
> 
> Yeah, I thought the same.
> What's the expected fix for Oilpan?

I think I need to mark ImportantAuthorRanges and ImportantAuthorRangeIterator as
STACK_ALLOCATED().

[rune, 2015-08-19 07:36:01]

On 2015/08/19 07:15:56, rune wrote:
> On 2015/08/19 01:51:02, Takayoshi Kochi wrote:
> > On 2015/08/19 01:41:46, Timothy Loh wrote:
> > > On 2015/08/18 14:59:05, commit-bot: I haz the power wrote:
> > > > Committed patchset #1 (id:1) as
> > > > https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=200728
> > > 
> > > Don't we normally not revert for Oilpan breakages?
> > 
> > Yeah, I thought the same.
> > What's the expected fix for Oilpan?
> 
> I think I need to mark ImportantAuthorRanges and ImportantAuthorRangeIterator
as
> STACK_ALLOCATED().

Trying here:

https://codereview.chromium.org/1283133006/#ps20001

[kochi, 2015-08-19 08:05:11]

On 2015/08/19 07:36:01, rune wrote:
> On 2015/08/19 07:15:56, rune wrote:
> > On 2015/08/19 01:51:02, Takayoshi Kochi wrote:
> > > On 2015/08/19 01:41:46, Timothy Loh wrote:
> > > > On 2015/08/18 14:59:05, commit-bot: I haz the power wrote:
> > > > > Committed patchset #1 (id:1) as
> > > > > https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=200728
> > > > 
> > > > Don't we normally not revert for Oilpan breakages?
> > > 
> > > Yeah, I thought the same.
> > > What's the expected fix for Oilpan?
> > 
> > I think I need to mark ImportantAuthorRanges and
ImportantAuthorRangeIterator
> as
> > STACK_ALLOCATED().
> 
> Trying here:
> 
> https://codereview.chromium.org/1283133006/#ps20001

If the fix is as trivial as to add STACK_ALLOCATED() in the class definition,
maybe we can reuse the original CL (1282243002) for resubmitting?

[rune, 2015-08-19 09:10:36]

On 2015/08/19 08:05:11, Takayoshi Kochi wrote:
> On 2015/08/19 07:36:01, rune wrote:
> > On 2015/08/19 07:15:56, rune wrote:
> > > On 2015/08/19 01:51:02, Takayoshi Kochi wrote:
> > > > On 2015/08/19 01:41:46, Timothy Loh wrote:
> > > > > On 2015/08/18 14:59:05, commit-bot: I haz the power wrote:
> > > > > > Committed patchset #1 (id:1) as
> > > > > > https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=200728
> > > > > 
> > > > > Don't we normally not revert for Oilpan breakages?
> > > > 
> > > > Yeah, I thought the same.
> > > > What's the expected fix for Oilpan?
> > > 
> > > I think I need to mark ImportantAuthorRanges and
> ImportantAuthorRangeIterator
> > as
> > > STACK_ALLOCATED().
> > 
> > Trying here:
> > 
> > https://codereview.chromium.org/1283133006/#ps20001
> 
> If the fix is as trivial as to add STACK_ALLOCATED() in the class definition,
> maybe we can reuse the original CL (1282243002) for resubmitting?

Yes, that made the trick for oilpan bot. Trying to re-land the original CL now.