[webcrypto] Allow both ArrayBuffer and ArrayBufferView as inputs to crypto.subtle methods.

[webcrypto] Allow both ArrayBuffer and ArrayBufferView as inputs to crypto.subtle methods.

This is in line with the webcrypto spec which takes CryptoOperationData as inputs throughout, and defines it as:

  typedef (ArrayBuffer or ArrayBufferView) CryptoOperationData;

BUG=369179, 245025
Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=173601

[abarth-chromium, 2014-05-06 05:30:49]

https://codereview.chromium.org/267133002/diff/1/Source/modules/crypto/Subtle...
File Source/modules/crypto/SubtleCrypto.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/267133002/diff/1/Source/modules/crypto/Subtle...
Source/modules/crypto/SubtleCrypto.h:62: };
Can you move this class in WTF?  It seems generally useful.  We might need to
give it a more decorated name though.  ArrayBytes??

[eroman, 2014-05-06 21:27:26]

https://codereview.chromium.org/267133002/diff/1/Source/modules/crypto/Subtle...
File Source/modules/crypto/SubtleCrypto.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/267133002/diff/1/Source/modules/crypto/Subtle...
Source/modules/crypto/SubtleCrypto.h:62: };
On 2014/05/06 05:30:49, abarth wrote:
> Can you move this class in WTF?  It seems generally useful.  We might need to
> give it a more decorated name though.  ArrayBytes??

Done.

[abarth-chromium, 2014-05-07 06:19:09]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/267133002/diff/90001/Source/wtf/ArrayBytes.h
File Source/wtf/ArrayBytes.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/267133002/diff/90001/Source/wtf/ArrayBytes.h#...
Source/wtf/ArrayBytes.h:22: class WTF_EXPORT ArrayBytes {
I guess we could call this an ArrayPiece after StringPiece...

https://codereview.chromium.org/267133002/diff/90001/Source/wtf/ArrayBytes.h#...
Source/wtf/ArrayBytes.h:45: bool m_isNull;
We can't use m_data == 0 as the m_isNull bit?

[eroman, 2014-05-07 21:34:57]

https://codereview.chromium.org/267133002/diff/90001/Source/wtf/ArrayBytes.h
File Source/wtf/ArrayBytes.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/267133002/diff/90001/Source/wtf/ArrayBytes.h#...
Source/wtf/ArrayBytes.h:22: class WTF_EXPORT ArrayBytes {
On 2014/05/07 06:19:10, abarth wrote:
> I guess we could call this an ArrayPiece after StringPiece...

Sounds good, will make the change.

https://codereview.chromium.org/267133002/diff/90001/Source/wtf/ArrayBytes.h#...
Source/wtf/ArrayBytes.h:45: bool m_isNull;
On 2014/05/07 06:19:10, abarth wrote:
> We can't use m_data == 0 as the m_isNull bit?

I want to be able to distinguish between a zero-length ArrayPiece vs an
ArrayPiece that was not initialized.

This comes up because the WebIDL generated code may call our methods with a
nullptr in place of  ArrayBuffer* and ArrayBufferView* (rather than throwing a
TypeError). So throwing the TypeError is then left to each implementation
(http://crbug.com/264520). Solving 264520 is a bigger task I am not prepared to
tackle just now, so I decided to make the adapter distinguish between:

   ArrayPiece(nullptr)
 vs
   ArrayPiece(zeroLengthArrayBuffer);

Which I think is generally useful anyway.

Interestingly, once I added the overloads in the .idl file, the generated
bindings no longer pass NULL when given an invalid ArrayBuffer/ArrayBufferView.
Instead it now correctly throws a TypeError to the effect of "No function was
found that matched the signature provided." (See the rebaselined tests).

So long story short: I can change ArrayPiece(nullptr) to be the same as an empty
ArrayPiece if you like, and still solve my particular use case. But I think
separating them will avoid future bugs.

[eroman, 2014-05-08 04:40:10]

The CQ bit was checked by eroman@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-08 04:40:41]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/eroman@chromium.org/267133002/110001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-08 04:55:26]

Change committed as 173601