Remove old C++03 move emulation code.

chrome/browser/spellchecker/spellcheck_hunspell_dictionary.cc

Index: chrome/browser/spellchecker/spellcheck_hunspell_dictionary.cc
diff --git a/chrome/browser/spellchecker/spellcheck_hunspell_dictionary.cc b/chrome/browser/spellchecker/spellcheck_hunspell_dictionary.cc
index 8ce3037417a41495500ebf94dc73402c0c069cdc..231a2fb2378c6df9fc48d74ff7ba492801678853 100644
--- a/chrome/browser/spellchecker/spellcheck_hunspell_dictionary.cc
+++ b/chrome/browser/spellchecker/spellcheck_hunspell_dictionary.cc
@@ -79,17 +79,16 @@ SpellcheckHunspellDictionary::DictionaryFile::~DictionaryFile() {
   }
 }
 
-SpellcheckHunspellDictionary::DictionaryFile::DictionaryFile(RValue other)
-    : path(other.object->path),
-      file(other.object->file.Pass()) {
-}
+SpellcheckHunspellDictionary::DictionaryFile::DictionaryFile(
+    DictionaryFile&& other)
+    : path(other.path), file(other.file.Pass()) {}
 
 SpellcheckHunspellDictionary::DictionaryFile&
-SpellcheckHunspellDictionary::DictionaryFile::operator=(RValue other) {
-  if (this != other.object) {
-    path = other.object->path;
-    file = other.object->file.Pass();
-  }
+    SpellcheckHunspellDictionary::DictionaryFile::
+    operator=(DictionaryFile&& other) {
+  DCHECK_NE(this, &other);

[danakj, 2015/10/15 23:35:06]

this looks non-destructive, can we remove the dcheck? or not i don't super mind
a DCHECK either.

[dcheng, 2015/10/16 00:40:01]

  file = other.file.Pass()

is destructive.

That being said, File::operator=(File&&) will DCHECK on a self-move here. So the
question is if it's OK for a class embedding a type to depend on the fact that a
self-move of the other type should/will DCHECK. My sense is probably? But I want
to confirm before actually making this change.

[danakj, 2015/10/16 00:44:24]

I think that's the right way to do it ya.

[dcheng, 2015/10/19 21:29:50]

Done.

+  path = other.path;
+  file = other.file.Pass();
   return *this;
 }