[#4] Pass gfx structs by const ref (gfx::PointF)

[#4] Pass gfx structs by const ref (gfx::PointF)

Avoid unneccessary copy of structures gfx::PointF
by passing them by const ref rather than value.

Any struct of size > 4 bytes should be passed by const ref.
Passing by ref for these structs is faster than passing
by value, especially when invoking function has multiple parameters.

Pass by value creates unneccessary overhead which should be avoided.

BUG=159273
R=danakj, enne, piman

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=245467

[r.kasibhatla, 2014-01-15 08:19:59]

PTAL.

[danakj, 2014-01-15 16:54:45]

LGTM but please remove the unrelated changes in math util

https://codereview.chromium.org/139233002/diff/1/cc/base/math_util.cc
File cc/base/math_util.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/139233002/diff/1/cc/base/math_util.cc#newcode98
cc/base/math_util.cc:98: gfx::PointF (&clipped_quad)[8],
This change seems unrelated?

https://codereview.chromium.org/139233002/diff/1/cc/base/math_util.cc#newcode159
cc/base/math_util.cc:159: gfx::PointF (&clipped_quad)[8],
This change seems unrelated?

https://codereview.chromium.org/139233002/diff/1/cc/base/math_util.cc#newcode226
cc/base/math_util.cc:226: gfx::RectF
MathUtil::ComputeEnclosingRectOfVertices(const gfx::PointF* vertices,
This change seems unrelated?

https://codereview.chromium.org/139233002/diff/1/cc/base/math_util.h
File cc/base/math_util.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/139233002/diff/1/cc/base/math_util.h#newcode116
cc/base/math_util.h:116: gfx::PointF (&clipped_quad)[8],
This change seems unrelated?

https://codereview.chromium.org/139233002/diff/1/cc/base/math_util.h#newcode119
cc/base/math_util.h:119: static gfx::RectF ComputeEnclosingRectOfVertices(const
gfx::PointF* vertices,
This change seems unrelated?

[r.kasibhatla, 2014-01-16 05:05:39]

https://codereview.chromium.org/139233002/diff/1/cc/base/math_util.cc
File cc/base/math_util.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/139233002/diff/1/cc/base/math_util.cc#newcode98
cc/base/math_util.cc:98: gfx::PointF (&clipped_quad)[8],
On 2014/01/15 16:54:46, danakj wrote:
> This change seems unrelated?
Agree. No need for the change. Reverted the change.

https://codereview.chromium.org/139233002/diff/1/cc/base/math_util.cc#newcode159
cc/base/math_util.cc:159: gfx::PointF (&clipped_quad)[8],
On 2014/01/15 16:54:46, danakj wrote:
> This change seems unrelated?
Agree. No need for the change. Reverted the change.

https://codereview.chromium.org/139233002/diff/1/cc/base/math_util.cc#newcode226
cc/base/math_util.cc:226: gfx::RectF
MathUtil::ComputeEnclosingRectOfVertices(const gfx::PointF* vertices,
On 2014/01/15 16:54:46, danakj wrote:
> This change seems unrelated?
As we are not modifying the 'vertices' array, we should mark it as const. Does
it make sense or should I make it different patch?

https://codereview.chromium.org/139233002/diff/1/cc/base/math_util.h
File cc/base/math_util.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/139233002/diff/1/cc/base/math_util.h#newcode116
cc/base/math_util.h:116: gfx::PointF (&clipped_quad)[8],
On 2014/01/15 16:54:46, danakj wrote:
> This change seems unrelated?
Agree. No need for the change. Reverted the change.

https://codereview.chromium.org/139233002/diff/1/cc/base/math_util.h#newcode119
cc/base/math_util.h:119: static gfx::RectF ComputeEnclosingRectOfVertices(const
gfx::PointF* vertices,
On 2014/01/15 16:54:46, danakj wrote:
> This change seems unrelated?
As we are not modifying the 'vertices' array, we should mark it as const. Does
it make sense or should I make it different patch?

[danakj, 2014-01-16 17:46:11]

https://codereview.chromium.org/139233002/diff/1/cc/base/math_util.cc
File cc/base/math_util.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/139233002/diff/1/cc/base/math_util.cc#newcode226
cc/base/math_util.cc:226: gfx::RectF
MathUtil::ComputeEnclosingRectOfVertices(const gfx::PointF* vertices,
On 2014/01/16 05:05:39, r.kasibhatla wrote:
> On 2014/01/15 16:54:46, danakj wrote:
> > This change seems unrelated?
> As we are not modifying the 'vertices' array, we should mark it as const. Does
> it make sense or should I make it different patch?

Sure.. won't hurt.

https://codereview.chromium.org/139233002/diff/1/cc/base/math_util.h
File cc/base/math_util.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/139233002/diff/1/cc/base/math_util.h#newcode119
cc/base/math_util.h:119: static gfx::RectF ComputeEnclosingRectOfVertices(const
gfx::PointF* vertices,
On 2014/01/16 05:05:39, r.kasibhatla wrote:
> On 2014/01/15 16:54:46, danakj wrote:
> > This change seems unrelated?
> As we are not modifying the 'vertices' array, we should mark it as const. Does
> it make sense or should I make it different patch?

That's fine.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-01-17 03:54:56]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/r.kasibhatla@samsung.com/139233002/50002

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-01-17 07:26:50]

Change committed as 245467