PaymentRequest: Introduce PaymentDetailsInit and PaymentDetailsUpdate.

components/payments/content/payment_request.mojom

 // Copyright 2016 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
 // Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
 // found in the LICENSE file.
 
 [JavaPackage="org.chromium.payments.mojom"]
 module payments.mojom;
 
 // The shipping address that the browser process provides to the renderer
 // process. Built either by the browser or a payment app.
 struct PaymentAddress {
@@ skipping 165 matching lines @@
   array<BasicCardType> supported_types;
 };
 
 struct PaymentDetailsModifier {
   PaymentItem? total;
   array<PaymentItem> additional_display_items;
   PaymentMethodData method_data;
 };
 
 struct PaymentDetails {
   PaymentItem total;

[please use gerrit instead, 2017/03/21 13:42:21]

Should be nullable, because it's optional in PaymentDetailsUpdate.idl. Since
it's nullable, please update payment_request.cc and PaymentRequestImpl.java to
(1) require the total in init() method and (2) not require the total in
updateWIth() method.

https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/components/payments/content/payment_requ...
https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/chrome/android/java/src/org/chromium/chr...

[zino, 2017/03/22 16:43:44]

Yes, I agree with you but I think this is non-trivial.

In the current implementation, the updateWith() function doesn’t match with the
payment request spec.
The spec says that only if some attribute of details is present, then the value
corresponding to the attribute is updated.
However, the current implementation will update all values regardless of whether
the attribute is present.

For example, the following code should update only total value on payment sheet
UI.
  e.updateWith({ total: { …. } });

But the current implementation will update all values such as shippingOptions.
So, the shippingOptions is set as empty sequence and then the UI will indicate
that the merchant cannot ship to the current shipping address.

I’ll fix them in follow-up CL.
(and I already filed the bug here: http://crbug.com/704162)
We will have to investigate whether the change breaks existing usage.

   array<PaymentItem> display_items;
   array<PaymentShippingOption> shipping_options;
   array<PaymentDetailsModifier> modifiers;
-  string error;
+  string error = "";
 };
 
 enum PaymentShippingType {
   SHIPPING,
   DELIVERY,
   PICKUP
 };
 
 struct PaymentOptions {
   bool request_payer_name;
@@ skipping 13 matching lines @@
   Init(PaymentRequestClient client,
        array<PaymentMethodData> method_data,
        PaymentDetails details,
        PaymentOptions options);
   Show();
   UpdateWith(PaymentDetails details);
   Abort();
   Complete(PaymentComplete result);
   CanMakePayment();
 };