Make BaseView et al. take an ApplicationConnector instead of an ApplicationImpl.

Make BaseView et al. take an ApplicationConnector instead of an ApplicationImpl.

In general, it's a bit of a layering violation to pass around
ApplicationImpl*'s, and it also poses some lifetime issues. (Using
ApplicationConnectors resolves any potential lifetime issues.)

Mostly though, I want to rework the way ApplicationImpl, etc. work, and
this gets in the way.

R=jeffbrown@google.com

Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/external/mojo/+/4ade0ed278a8a25b32ded431c3c7859899115b53

[viettrungluu, 2016-05-18 18:02:54]

Description was changed from

==========
Make BaseView et al. take an ApplicationConnector instead of an ApplicationImpl.

In general, it's a bit of a layering violation to pass around
ApplicationImpl*'s, and it also poses some lifetime issues. (Using
ApplicationConnectors resolves any potential lifetime issues.)

Mostly though, I want to rework the way ApplicationImpl, etc. work, and
this gets in the way.

R=jeffbrown@google.com
==========

to

==========
Make BaseView et al. take an ApplicationConnector instead of an ApplicationImpl.

In general, it's a bit of a layering violation to pass around
ApplicationImpl*'s, and it also poses some lifetime issues. (Using
ApplicationConnectors resolves any potential lifetime issues.)

Mostly though, I want to rework the way ApplicationImpl, etc. work, and
this gets in the way.
==========

[viettrungluu, 2016-05-18 18:02:54]

viettrungluu@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ vardhan@google.com

[viettrungluu, 2016-05-18 18:03:16]

(jeff or vardhan, whoever gets to this first)

[jeffbrown, 2016-05-18 22:00:49]

lgtm

[viettrungluu, 2016-05-18 22:48:52]

Description was changed from

==========
Make BaseView et al. take an ApplicationConnector instead of an ApplicationImpl.

In general, it's a bit of a layering violation to pass around
ApplicationImpl*'s, and it also poses some lifetime issues. (Using
ApplicationConnectors resolves any potential lifetime issues.)

Mostly though, I want to rework the way ApplicationImpl, etc. work, and
this gets in the way.
==========

to

==========
Make BaseView et al. take an ApplicationConnector instead of an ApplicationImpl.

In general, it's a bit of a layering violation to pass around
ApplicationImpl*'s, and it also poses some lifetime issues. (Using
ApplicationConnectors resolves any potential lifetime issues.)

Mostly though, I want to rework the way ApplicationImpl, etc. work, and
this gets in the way.

R=jeffbrown@google.com
==========

[viettrungluu, 2016-05-18 22:55:20]

Description was changed from

==========
Make BaseView et al. take an ApplicationConnector instead of an ApplicationImpl.

In general, it's a bit of a layering violation to pass around
ApplicationImpl*'s, and it also poses some lifetime issues. (Using
ApplicationConnectors resolves any potential lifetime issues.)

Mostly though, I want to rework the way ApplicationImpl, etc. work, and
this gets in the way.

R=jeffbrown@google.com
==========

to

==========
Make BaseView et al. take an ApplicationConnector instead of an ApplicationImpl.

In general, it's a bit of a layering violation to pass around
ApplicationImpl*'s, and it also poses some lifetime issues. (Using
ApplicationConnectors resolves any potential lifetime issues.)

Mostly though, I want to rework the way ApplicationImpl, etc. work, and
this gets in the way.

R=jeffbrown@google.com

Committed:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/external/mojo/+/4ade0ed278a8a25b32ded431c3c...
==========

[viettrungluu, 2016-05-18 22:55:22]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001) manually as
4ade0ed278a8a25b32ded431c3c7859899115b53 (presubmit successful).