Move showLineTreeAndMark() to LayoutBlockFlow.

Move showLineTreeAndMark() to LayoutBlockFlow.

BUG=302024
Committed: https://crrev.com/6d08c6a5f76117438e9a9877e7fe458103166fac
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#391757}

[mstensho (USE GERRIT), 2016-05-04 18:41:34]

mstensho@opera.com changed reviewers:
+ eae@chromium.org, leviw@chromium.org, szager@chromium.org,
wkorman@chromium.org

[wkorman, 2016-05-04 20:30:41]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/1952763002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/c...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/layout/LayoutObject.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1952763002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/c...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/layout/LayoutObject.cpp:1663: if
(cb->isLayoutBlockFlow())
Does this change behavior of what we output at all? If so consider updating CL
description.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1952763002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/c...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/layout/LayoutObject.cpp:1664:
toLayoutBlockFlow(cb)->showLineTreeAndMark(0, 0, 0, 0, this);
Use nullptr rather than 0. Is it untoward re: consistency of showXxx() methods
to alter param order so we can just pass this and rely on defaults for the
others?

[mstensho (USE GERRIT), 2016-05-04 20:54:25]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1952763002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/c...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/layout/LayoutObject.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1952763002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/c...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/layout/LayoutObject.cpp:1663: if
(cb->isLayoutBlockFlow())
On 2016/05/04 20:30:41, wkorman wrote:
> Does this change behavior of what we output at all? If so consider updating CL
> description.

In theory, yes. If someone wants to display the line tree they're in when
they're not in a block container (LayoutBlockFlow) (and therefore doesn't
participate in an inline formatting context), we'll now do nothing, rather than
calling showLayoutObject(), which would be the previous behavior. I see no value
in someone doing something as stupid as that, though. :)

This is debug code, FWIW.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1952763002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/c...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/layout/LayoutObject.cpp:1664:
toLayoutBlockFlow(cb)->showLineTreeAndMark(0, 0, 0, 0, this);
On 2016/05/04 20:30:41, wkorman wrote:
> Use nullptr rather than 0.

Done.

> Is it untoward re: consistency of showXxx() methods
> to alter param order so we can just pass this and rely on defaults for the
> others?

Deserves a separate CL, if anything. There are multiple callers of
showLineTreeAndMark(), and all I want in this CL is to get rid of line layout
code from LayoutBlock.

[szager1, 2016-05-04 21:11:38]

lgtm

http://i.imgur.com/7drHiqr.gif

[mstensho (USE GERRIT), 2016-05-05 04:51:44]

The CQ bit was checked by mstensho@opera.com

[mstensho (USE GERRIT), 2016-05-05 04:51:44]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from wkorman@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1952763002/#ps20001
(title: "Use nullptr")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-05 04:51:57]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1952763002/20001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1952763002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-05 04:55:16]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-05 04:56:32]

Description was changed from

==========
Move showLineTreeAndMark() to LayoutBlockFlow.

BUG=302024
==========

to

==========
Move showLineTreeAndMark() to LayoutBlockFlow.

BUG=302024

Committed: https://crrev.com/6d08c6a5f76117438e9a9877e7fe458103166fac
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#391757}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-05 04:56:34]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/6d08c6a5f76117438e9a9877e7fe458103166fac
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#391757}