[heap] Limit friendship of the Heap class to essentials.

[heap] Limit friendship of the Heap class to essentials.

This makes it clear that only components within the "heap" directory
should be friends with the Heap class. The two notable exceptions are
Factory and Isolate which represent external interfaces into the heap.

R=mlippautz@chromium.org

Committed: https://crrev.com/8d54fc2e876ae7ba278a09ff1b0733f07cf68ff0
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#30408}

[Michael Starzinger, 2015-08-27 09:23:58]

mstarzinger@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ yangguo@chromium.org

[Michael Starzinger, 2015-08-27 09:23:59]

Yang: PTAL at bootstrapper and deserializer.
Mike: PTAL.

[Hannes Payer (out of office), 2015-08-27 09:25:01]

hpayer@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ hpayer@chromium.org

[Hannes Payer (out of office), 2015-08-27 09:25:02]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1320843002/diff/1/src/heap/heap.h
File src/heap/heap.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1320843002/diff/1/src/heap/heap.h#newcode1231
src/heap/heap.h:1231: void public_set_code_stub_context(Object* value) {
These are not "real" setters. Hence, they should not use the setter syntax. Why
public_*? Is this the right terminology? I think they are public because they
are part of the public section in heap.

[Michael Starzinger, 2015-08-27 09:27:48]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1320843002/diff/1/src/heap/heap.h
File src/heap/heap.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1320843002/diff/1/src/heap/heap.h#newcode1231
src/heap/heap.h:1231: void public_set_code_stub_context(Object* value) {
On 2015/08/27 09:25:02, Hannes Payer wrote:
> These are not "real" setters. Hence, they should not use the setter syntax.
Why
> public_*? Is this the right terminology? I think they are public because they
> are part of the public section in heap.

The "public" prefix is to not clash with the private versions of these setters.
There are private setters for the entire root set on the heap further down
below. As for the naming, I don't have a strong opinion, choose whatever name
you like and I'll rename it. But just FYI, this is not new, this has been here
for ages, I am just unifying it.

[Yang, 2015-08-27 09:28:45]

On 2015/08/27 09:27:48, Michael Starzinger wrote:
> https://codereview.chromium.org/1320843002/diff/1/src/heap/heap.h
> File src/heap/heap.h (right):
> 
> https://codereview.chromium.org/1320843002/diff/1/src/heap/heap.h#newcode1231
> src/heap/heap.h:1231: void public_set_code_stub_context(Object* value) {
> On 2015/08/27 09:25:02, Hannes Payer wrote:
> > These are not "real" setters. Hence, they should not use the setter syntax.
> Why
> > public_*? Is this the right terminology? I think they are public because
they
> > are part of the public section in heap.
> 
> The "public" prefix is to not clash with the private versions of these
setters.
> There are private setters for the entire root set on the heap further down
> below. As for the naming, I don't have a strong opinion, choose whatever name
> you like and I'll rename it. But just FYI, this is not new, this has been here
> for ages, I am just unifying it.

snapshot part lgtm.

[Hannes Payer (out of office), 2015-08-27 10:11:01]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1320843002/diff/1/src/heap/heap.h
File src/heap/heap.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1320843002/diff/1/src/heap/heap.h#newcode1231
src/heap/heap.h:1231: void public_set_code_stub_context(Object* value) {
On 2015/08/27 09:27:48, Michael Starzinger wrote:
> On 2015/08/27 09:25:02, Hannes Payer wrote:
> > These are not "real" setters. Hence, they should not use the setter syntax.
> Why
> > public_*? Is this the right terminology? I think they are public because
they
> > are part of the public section in heap.
> 
> The "public" prefix is to not clash with the private versions of these
setters.
> There are private setters for the entire root set on the heap further down
> below. As for the naming, I don't have a strong opinion, choose whatever name
> you like and I'll rename it. But just FYI, this is not new, this has been here
> for ages, I am just unifying it.

I would prefer SetRoot*

[Hannes Payer (out of office), 2015-08-27 10:39:17]

lgtm, after beautifying the names

[Michael Starzinger, 2015-08-27 11:09:13]

Addressed comments.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1320843002/diff/1/src/heap/heap.h
File src/heap/heap.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1320843002/diff/1/src/heap/heap.h#newcode1231
src/heap/heap.h:1231: void public_set_code_stub_context(Object* value) {
On 2015/08/27 10:11:00, Hannes Payer wrote:
> On 2015/08/27 09:27:48, Michael Starzinger wrote:
> > On 2015/08/27 09:25:02, Hannes Payer wrote:
> > > These are not "real" setters. Hence, they should not use the setter
syntax.
> > Why
> > > public_*? Is this the right terminology? I think they are public because
> they
> > > are part of the public section in heap.
> > 
> > The "public" prefix is to not clash with the private versions of these
> setters.
> > There are private setters for the entire root set on the heap further down
> > below. As for the naming, I don't have a strong opinion, choose whatever
name
> > you like and I'll rename it. But just FYI, this is not new, this has been
here
> > for ages, I am just unifying it.
> 
> I would prefer SetRoot* 

Done. Your slight preference is my command.

[Michael Starzinger, 2015-08-27 11:50:23]

The CQ bit was checked by mstarzinger@chromium.org

[Michael Starzinger, 2015-08-27 11:50:23]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from hpayer@chromium.org,
yangguo@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1320843002/#ps40001
(title: "Addressed comment.")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-27 11:50:32]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1320843002/40001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1320843002/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-27 11:52:54]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-27 11:52:55]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  v8_presubmit on tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_presubmit/builds/5281)

[mvstanton, 2015-08-27 12:27:09]

mvstanton@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ mvstanton@chromium.org

[mvstanton, 2015-08-27 12:27:10]

lgtm

[Michael Starzinger, 2015-08-27 12:28:55]

The CQ bit was checked by mstarzinger@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-27 12:29:00]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1320843002/40001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1320843002/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-27 12:30:09]

Committed patchset #3 (id:40001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-27 12:30:24]

Patchset 3 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/8d54fc2e876ae7ba278a09ff1b0733f07cf68ff0
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#30408}