Allowing registering arbitrary schemes as supporting the fetch API.

Source/platform/weborigin/SchemeRegistry.cpp

Index: Source/platform/weborigin/SchemeRegistry.cpp
diff --git a/Source/platform/weborigin/SchemeRegistry.cpp b/Source/platform/weborigin/SchemeRegistry.cpp
index 822ae67a5fe8b98591ec9a7d7fae47c79435fcb1..099dbbb17a03895397bf9870779e686e6c41353c 100644
--- a/Source/platform/weborigin/SchemeRegistry.cpp
+++ b/Source/platform/weborigin/SchemeRegistry.cpp
@@ -176,6 +176,19 @@ static URLSchemesSet& serviceWorkerSchemes()
     return serviceWorkerSchemes;
 }
 
+static URLSchemesSet& fetchAPISchemes()
+{
+    assertLockHeld();
+    DEFINE_STATIC_LOCAL_NOASSERT(URLSchemesSet, fetchAPISchemes, ());
+
+    if (fetchAPISchemes.isEmpty()) {
+        fetchAPISchemes.add("http");
+        fetchAPISchemes.add("https");
+    }
+
+    return fetchAPISchemes;
+}
+
 static URLSchemesMap<SchemeRegistry::PolicyAreas>& ContentSecurityPolicyBypassingSchemes()
 {
     assertLockHeld();
@@ -353,6 +366,20 @@ bool SchemeRegistry::shouldTreatURLSchemeAsAllowingServiceWorkers(const String&
     return serviceWorkerSchemes().contains(scheme);
 }
 
+void SchemeRegistry::registerURLSchemeAsSupportingFetchAPI(const String& scheme)
+{
+    MutexLocker locker(mutex());
+    fetchAPISchemes().add(scheme);
+}
+
+bool SchemeRegistry::shouldTreatURLSchemeAsSupportingFetchAPI(const String& scheme)
+{
+    if (scheme.isEmpty())

[dcheng, 2015/08/25 20:07:32]

Out of curiosity, any particular reason to special case this?

[not at google - send to devlin, 2015/08/25 20:09:03]

No idea, I just copied service worker code, but I agree in both cases it's weird
to be checking for an empty scheme here. It's (hopefully) not like URLSchemesSet
will crash with an empty scheme.

[pdr., 2015/08/25 21:25:10]

Lets just assert !scheme.isEmpty().

[not at google - send to devlin, 2015/08/25 22:04:45]

SGTM, if you're confident, but it would be odd for this function to be different
from every other which does check for it. I'd be more comfortable in just
removing every check.

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2015/08/26 07:24:48]

+1. Change to other methods could be done as a separate CL.

[not at google - send to devlin, 2015/08/26 16:30:32]

Acknowledged.

+        return false;
+    MutexLocker locker(mutex());
+    return fetchAPISchemes().contains(scheme);
+}
+
 void SchemeRegistry::registerURLSchemeAsBypassingContentSecurityPolicy(const String& scheme, PolicyAreas policyAreas)
 {
     MutexLocker locker(mutex());