Pow __proto__, sock :unresolved, and clunk the created callback at once.

Pow __proto__, sock :unresolved, and clunk the created callback at once.

This aligns the timing of the Custom Elements __proto__ swizzle,
changed applicability of the :unresolved pseudoclass, and call to the
created callback. Now instanceof, :unresolved and a Custom Element
having had a chance to initialize itself are all consistent.

This changes the order in which the created callbacks of
parser-created Custom Elements are processed to be reverse document
order, per a proposal being discussed on this bug:
<https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22459>;

For now, the created callbacks of upgrade candidates continues to be
processed in whimsical order (specfically, HashSet iteration order).

BUG=234509
Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=153558

[dominicc (has gone to gerrit), 2013-07-03 10:48:54]

This assumes Issue 18592004 goes first.

[esprehn, 2013-07-04 00:54:57]

https://codereview.chromium.org/18258003/diff/1/Source/core/dom/CustomElement...
File Source/core/dom/CustomElementRegistry.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/18258003/diff/1/Source/core/dom/CustomElement...
Source/core/dom/CustomElementRegistry.cpp:140:
CustomElementUpgradeCandidateMap::ElementSet upgradeCandidates =
m_candidates.takeUpgradeCandidatesFor(definition.get());
Why does this use an HashSet? takeUpgradeCandidatesFor is iterating over a set
already, so we should just return a Vector here and avoid having to do all the
hashing in there.

https://codereview.chromium.org/18258003/diff/1/Source/core/dom/Node.h
File Source/core/dom/Node.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/18258003/diff/1/Source/core/dom/Node.h#newcod...
Source/core/dom/Node.h:739: IsUpgradedCustomElement = 1 << 28,
I already used bit 28 with something else a day or so ago, so you'd need to use
29.

[esprehn, 2013-07-04 01:01:24]

https://codereview.chromium.org/18258003/diff/1/Source/bindings/v8/V8CustomEl...
File Source/bindings/v8/V8CustomElementLifecycleCallbacks.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/18258003/diff/1/Source/bindings/v8/V8CustomEl...
Source/bindings/v8/V8CustomElementLifecycleCallbacks.cpp:109: receiver =
v8::Handle<v8::Object>::Cast(elementHandle);
Just use toV8(...).As<v8::Object>() it'll ASSERT and everything for you.

receiver = toV8(element, context->Global(), isolate).As<v8::Object>();

[dominicc (has gone to gerrit), 2013-07-04 01:22:30]

PTAL.

[esprehn, 2013-07-04 01:29:00]

https://codereview.chromium.org/18258003/diff/10001/Source/bindings/v8/V8Cust...
File Source/bindings/v8/V8CustomElementLifecycleCallbacks.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/18258003/diff/10001/Source/bindings/v8/V8Cust...
Source/bindings/v8/V8CustomElementLifecycleCallbacks.cpp:48:
prototype->SetHiddenValue(V8HiddenPropertyName::customElementCreated(),
created);
I don't think this can work, what if I register the same prototype for two
custom elements (x-foo and x-bar) with different created callbacks?

https://codereview.chromium.org/18258003/diff/10001/Source/core/dom/CustomEle...
File Source/core/dom/CustomElementRegistry.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/18258003/diff/10001/Source/core/dom/CustomEle...
Source/core/dom/CustomElementRegistry.cpp:141: Vector<Element*>
upgradeCandidates = m_candidates.takeUpgradeCandidatesFor(definition.get());
I think you want a const reference to avoid the copy here?

[dominicc (has gone to gerrit), 2013-07-04 03:03:13]

Thanks! And thank you for teaching me this:
<http://herbsutter.com/2008/01/01/gotw-88-a-candidate-for-the-most-important-c...>

Feedback done. Brought to ToT; codereview complains "Base files missing" :/

PTAL

[esprehn, 2013-07-04 03:06:55]

LGTM

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-07-04 03:14:16]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/dominicc@chromium.org/18258003/26001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-07-04 04:28:12]

Sorry for I got bad news for ya.
Compile failed with a clobber build on win_layout_rel.
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/buildstatus?builder=win_layout...
Your code is likely broken or HEAD is junk. Please ensure your
code is not broken then alert the build sheriffs.
Look at the try server FAQ for more details.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-07-04 04:53:21]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/dominicc@chromium.org/18258003/36001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-07-04 06:39:59]

Change committed as 153558