Remove out of date TODO comment.

Remove out of date TODO comment.

Comment "remove this once OrderedSocketData and DelayedSocketData have been
removed" is incorrect, because StaticSocketData also depends on ASYNC writes.
Since there are no short term plans to remove StaticSocketData, this CL removes
the TODO comment.  See comments 4 and 5 on codereview for discussion.

Committed: https://crrev.com/32d67a278191eac04b88296a5e979991db4ac1af
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#360975}

[Bence, 2015-11-19 19:24:36]

Description was changed from

==========
Remove last artifact of OrderedSocketData and DelayedSocketData.

OrderedSocketData and DelayedSocketData have already been removed.  The only
reference in the codebase to them was a TODO to remove an ASYNC condition.  Four
tests needed slight adjustment.
==========

to

==========
DRAFT Remove last artifact of OrderedSocketData and DelayedSocketData.

OrderedSocketData and DelayedSocketData have already been removed.  The only
reference in the codebase to them was a TODO to remove an ASYNC condition.  Four
tests needed slight adjustment.
==========

[Bence, 2015-11-19 20:33:26]

bnc@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ rch@chromium.org

[Bence, 2015-11-19 20:33:27]

Ryan: there is this TODO in socket_test_util.cc to remove the ASYNC write
functionality, but I don't quite grok it.  I know that OrderedSocketData and
DelayedSocketData have been removed, but some tests rely on ASYNC writes.  I
could fix them all, but I am not quite sure this is what we want.  For example,
we still support ASYNC reads (lines 1154--1158).  How would you like me to
proceed?  Thanks.

[Ryan Hamilton, 2015-11-19 21:52:19]

On 2015/11/19 20:33:27, Bence wrote:
> Ryan: there is this TODO in socket_test_util.cc to remove the ASYNC write
> functionality, but I don't quite grok it.  I know that OrderedSocketData and
> DelayedSocketData have been removed, but some tests rely on ASYNC writes.  I
> could fix them all, but I am not quite sure this is what we want.  For
example,
> we still support ASYNC reads (lines 1154--1158).  How would you like me to
> proceed?  Thanks.

Hm. It looks like StaticSocketDataProvider still depends on this behavior :/
(based on socks5_client_socket_unittest.cc) Sounds like the TODO is out of date
but I'm not sure the code can be removed. (Unless we nuke StaticSocketData).

[Bence, 2015-11-19 22:14:11]

On 2015/11/19 21:52:19, Ryan Hamilton wrote:
> On 2015/11/19 20:33:27, Bence wrote:
> > Ryan: there is this TODO in socket_test_util.cc to remove the ASYNC write
> > functionality, but I don't quite grok it.  I know that OrderedSocketData and
> > DelayedSocketData have been removed, but some tests rely on ASYNC writes.  I
> > could fix them all, but I am not quite sure this is what we want.  For
> example,
> > we still support ASYNC reads (lines 1154--1158).  How would you like me to
> > proceed?  Thanks.
> 
> Hm. It looks like StaticSocketDataProvider still depends on this behavior :/
> (based on socks5_client_socket_unittest.cc) Sounds like the TODO is out of
date
> but I'm not sure the code can be removed. (Unless we nuke StaticSocketData).

Thanks, this makes sense.  Shall I just remove the TODO then?  I don't believe
we plan to remove StaticSocketData.

[Ryan Hamilton, 2015-11-19 22:35:08]

On 2015/11/19 22:14:11, Bence wrote:
> On 2015/11/19 21:52:19, Ryan Hamilton wrote:
> > On 2015/11/19 20:33:27, Bence wrote:
> > > Ryan: there is this TODO in socket_test_util.cc to remove the ASYNC write
> > > functionality, but I don't quite grok it.  I know that OrderedSocketData
and
> > > DelayedSocketData have been removed, but some tests rely on ASYNC writes. 
I
> > > could fix them all, but I am not quite sure this is what we want.  For
> > example,
> > > we still support ASYNC reads (lines 1154--1158).  How would you like me to
> > > proceed?  Thanks.
> > 
> > Hm. It looks like StaticSocketDataProvider still depends on this behavior :/
> > (based on socks5_client_socket_unittest.cc) Sounds like the TODO is out of
> date
> > but I'm not sure the code can be removed. (Unless we nuke StaticSocketData).
> 
> Thanks, this makes sense.  Shall I just remove the TODO then?  I don't believe
> we plan to remove StaticSocketData.

SGTM

[Bence, 2015-11-20 13:22:55]

Description was changed from

==========
DRAFT Remove last artifact of OrderedSocketData and DelayedSocketData.

OrderedSocketData and DelayedSocketData have already been removed.  The only
reference in the codebase to them was a TODO to remove an ASYNC condition.  Four
tests needed slight adjustment.
==========

to

==========
Remove out of date TODO comment.

Comment "remove this once OrderedSocketData and DelayedSocketData have been
removed" is incorrect, because StaticSocketData also depends on ASYNC writes.
Since there are no short term plans to remove StaticSocketData, this CL removes
the TODO comment.  See comments 4 and 5 on codereview for discussion.
==========

[Bence, 2015-11-20 13:23:25]

Ryan: PTAL.

[Ryan Hamilton, 2015-11-20 23:29:27]

lgtm

[Bence, 2015-11-21 00:48:46]

The CQ bit was checked by bnc@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-11-21 00:49:13]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1460023002/20001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1460023002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-11-21 01:08:41]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-11-21 01:10:07]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/32d67a278191eac04b88296a5e979991db4ac1af
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#360975}