Implement frames() timing function

cc/animation/keyframed_animation_curve_unittest.cc

Index: cc/animation/keyframed_animation_curve_unittest.cc
diff --git a/cc/animation/keyframed_animation_curve_unittest.cc b/cc/animation/keyframed_animation_curve_unittest.cc
index a7b0e345b99c95d9b84974d60dd18de6e7c310b0..8bc87d4d1fa10c69b1d75adb87c2e637daf44c13 100644
--- a/cc/animation/keyframed_animation_curve_unittest.cc
+++ b/cc/animation/keyframed_animation_curve_unittest.cc
@@ -535,6 +535,31 @@ TEST(KeyframedAnimationCurveTest, StepsTimingFunctionStepAtEnd) {
   }
 }
 
+// Tests a frames timing function.
+TEST(KeyframedAnimationCurveTest, FramesTimingFunction) {
+  std::unique_ptr<KeyframedFloatAnimationCurve> curve(
+      KeyframedFloatAnimationCurve::Create());
+  curve->AddKeyframe(FloatKeyframe::Create(base::TimeDelta(), 0.f,
+                                           FramesTimingFunction::Create(5)));
+  curve->AddKeyframe(
+      FloatKeyframe::Create(base::TimeDelta::FromSecondsD(1.0), 1.f, nullptr));
+
+  EXPECT_FLOAT_EQ(0.f, curve->GetValue(base::TimeDelta()));
+  EXPECT_FLOAT_EQ(0.f, curve->GetValue(base::TimeDelta::FromSecondsD(0.1999)));
+  EXPECT_FLOAT_EQ(0.25f,
+                  curve->GetValue(base::TimeDelta::FromSecondsD(0.2001)));
+  EXPECT_FLOAT_EQ(0.25f,
+                  curve->GetValue(base::TimeDelta::FromSecondsD(0.3999)));
+  EXPECT_FLOAT_EQ(0.5f, curve->GetValue(base::TimeDelta::FromSecondsD(0.4001)));
+  EXPECT_FLOAT_EQ(0.5f, curve->GetValue(base::TimeDelta::FromSecondsD(0.5999)));
+  EXPECT_FLOAT_EQ(0.75f,
+                  curve->GetValue(base::TimeDelta::FromSecondsD(0.6001)));
+  EXPECT_FLOAT_EQ(0.75f,
+                  curve->GetValue(base::TimeDelta::FromSecondsD(0.7999)));
+  EXPECT_FLOAT_EQ(1.f, curve->GetValue(base::TimeDelta::FromSecondsD(0.8001)));
+  EXPECT_FLOAT_EQ(1.f, curve->GetValue(base::TimeDelta::FromSecondsD(1.0)));

[alancutter (OOO until 2018), 2017/03/29 04:58:30]

These line wraps make the test a bit harder to read and verify, I'd consider
having a helper function to reduce the line length.

[suzyh_UTC10 (ex-contributor), 2017/04/04 01:02:02]

Rearranged. How's this?

git cl format has Opinions about how the expectations data should be formatted.
Let me know if this formatting is fine or if I should add incantations to force
it into a different format.

+}
+
 // Tests that animated bounds are computed as expected.
 TEST(KeyframedAnimationCurveTest, AnimatedBounds) {
   std::unique_ptr<KeyframedTransformAnimationCurve> curve(
@@ -835,6 +860,23 @@ TEST(KeyframedAnimationCurveTest, StepsTimingInputsOutsideZeroOneRange) {
   EXPECT_FLOAT_EQ(2.f, curve->GetValue(base::TimeDelta::FromSecondsD(0.75f)));
 }
 
+// Tests that a frames timing function works as expected for inputs outside of
+// range [0,1]

[alancutter (OOO until 2018), 2017/03/29 04:58:30]

Bah these comments, they're just repeating the test name. No need to alter given
it's consistent.

[suzyh_UTC10 (ex-contributor), 2017/04/04 01:02:02]

Ack.

+TEST(KeyframedAnimationCurveTest, FramesTimingInputsOutsideZeroOneRange) {
+  std::unique_ptr<KeyframedFloatAnimationCurve> curve(
+      KeyframedFloatAnimationCurve::Create());
+  curve->AddKeyframe(FloatKeyframe::Create(base::TimeDelta(), 0.f,
+                                           FramesTimingFunction::Create(5)));
+  curve->AddKeyframe(
+      FloatKeyframe::Create(base::TimeDelta::FromSecondsD(1.0), 2.f, nullptr));
+  // Curve timing function producing timing outputs outside of range [0,1].
+  curve->SetTimingFunction(
+      CubicBezierTimingFunction::Create(0.5f, -0.5f, 0.5f, 1.5f));
+
+  EXPECT_FLOAT_EQ(0.f, curve->GetValue(base::TimeDelta::FromSecondsD(0.25f)));
+  EXPECT_FLOAT_EQ(2.f, curve->GetValue(base::TimeDelta::FromSecondsD(0.75f)));
+}
+
 // Tests that an animation with a curve timing function and multiple keyframes
 // works as expected.
 TEST(KeyframedAnimationCurveTest, CurveTimingMultipleKeyframes) {