Make comments in byte_stream.cc gender neutral.

content/browser/byte_stream.cc

Index: content/browser/byte_stream.cc
diff --git a/content/browser/byte_stream.cc b/content/browser/byte_stream.cc
index 1c70739a9f4171f248d87f1b4d0c322f7ad0fd39..eea499df24add373c1930cfaccd8b4b51eac5401 100644
--- a/content/browser/byte_stream.cc
+++ b/content/browser/byte_stream.cc
@@ -22,12 +22,11 @@ ContentVector;
 
 class ByteStreamReaderImpl;
 
-// A poor man's weak pointer; a RefCountedThreadSafe boolean that can be
-// cleared in an object destructor and accessed to check for object
-// existence.  We can't use weak pointers because they're tightly tied to
-// threads rather than task runners.
-// TODO(rdsmith): A better solution would be extending weak pointers
-// to support SequencedTaskRunners.
+// This is a RefCountedThreadSafe boolean that can be cleared in an object

[Matt Giuca, 2016/11/25 00:35:42]

drive-by: I don't think we should lose this sentence. The idea that it is a
"poor man's weak pointer" is important to give the reader context about what
type of thing this class is trying to emulate, poorly.

How about "a simplistic weak pointer" or "a poor-person's weak pointer"? (Also
see email I just sent about "poor-man" in general.)

[meredithl, 2016/11/27 23:49:21]

Done.

+// destructor and accessed to check for object existence.  We can't use weak
+// pointers because they're tightly tied to threads rather than task runners.
+// TODO(rdsmith): A better solution would be extending weak pointers to support
+// SequencedTaskRunners.
 struct LifetimeFlag : public base::RefCountedThreadSafe<LifetimeFlag> {
  public:
   LifetimeFlag() : is_alive(true) { }