Simplify GlyphPage initialization for SegmentedFontData

Simplify GlyphPage initialization for SegmentedFontData

Instead of filling a scratch page and merging it to m_page, just call
fill() on m_page in reverse order of the segmented ranges.
Also change OpenTypeVerticalData::substituteWithVerticalGlyphs() to check
FontData since the page passed may contain different FontData.

BUG=none
TEST=blink_platform_unittests

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=171835

[eae, 2014-04-15 07:15:07]

On 2014/04/15 07:12:31, Kunihiko Sakamoto wrote:

The change itself is great but I'm a little concerned about making changes to
this code as it isn't well tested. I don't suppose we could add a unit test for
it?

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2014-04-15 11:12:59]

On 2014/04/15 07:15:07, eae wrote:
> On 2014/04/15 07:12:31, Kunihiko Sakamoto wrote:
> 
> The change itself is great but I'm a little concerned about making changes to
> this code as it isn't well tested. I don't suppose we could add a unit test
for
> it?

Might be able to write unit test by faking SimpleFontData. I'll give it a try
tomorrow.

[eae, 2014-04-15 19:28:12]

On 2014/04/15 11:12:59, Kunihiko Sakamoto wrote:
> On 2014/04/15 07:15:07, eae wrote:
> > On 2014/04/15 07:12:31, Kunihiko Sakamoto wrote:
> > 
> > The change itself is great but I'm a little concerned about making changes
to
> > this code as it isn't well tested. I don't suppose we could add a unit test
> for
> > it?
> 
> Might be able to write unit test by faking SimpleFontData. I'll give it a try
> tomorrow.

Thanks, if it doesn't work out or you need help please let me know.

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2014-04-16 06:05:21]

On 2014/04/15 19:28:12, eae wrote:
> On 2014/04/15 11:12:59, Kunihiko Sakamoto wrote:
> > On 2014/04/15 07:15:07, eae wrote:
> > > On 2014/04/15 07:12:31, Kunihiko Sakamoto wrote:
> > > 
> > > The change itself is great but I'm a little concerned about making changes
> to
> > > this code as it isn't well tested. I don't suppose we could add a unit
test
> > for
> > > it?
> > 
> > Might be able to write unit test by faking SimpleFontData. I'll give it a
try
> > tomorrow.
> 
> Thanks, if it doesn't work out or you need help please let me know.

Made a separate patch for it: https://codereview.chromium.org/240003002/

[eae, 2014-04-16 14:36:48]

On 2014/04/16 06:05:21, Kunihiko Sakamoto wrote:
> On 2014/04/15 19:28:12, eae wrote:
> > On 2014/04/15 11:12:59, Kunihiko Sakamoto wrote:
> > > On 2014/04/15 07:15:07, eae wrote:
> > > > On 2014/04/15 07:12:31, Kunihiko Sakamoto wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > The change itself is great but I'm a little concerned about making
changes
> > to
> > > > this code as it isn't well tested. I don't suppose we could add a unit
> test
> > > for
> > > > it?
> > > 
> > > Might be able to write unit test by faking SimpleFontData. I'll give it a
> try
> > > tomorrow.
> > 
> > Thanks, if it doesn't work out or you need help please let me know.
> 
> Made a separate patch for it: https://codereview.chromium.org/240003002/

Awesome, thank you.

LGTM

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2014-04-17 02:19:36]

The CQ bit was checked by ksakamoto@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-04-17 02:19:54]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/ksakamoto@chromium.org/235863018/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-04-17 03:29:15]

Change committed as 171835