[WebPayments] Implementing Profile filter and dedupe

components/payments/content/profile_util.h

Index: components/payments/content/profile_util.h
diff --git a/components/payments/content/profile_util.h b/components/payments/content/profile_util.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4f5ec94fd5149cc8566c2dbdc7a87d82835a36fb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/components/payments/content/profile_util.h
@@ -0,0 +1,66 @@
+// Copyright 2017 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.
+#ifndef COMPONENTS_PAYMENTS_CONTENT_PROFILE_UTIL_H_
+#define COMPONENTS_PAYMENTS_CONTENT_PROFILE_UTIL_H_
+
+#include <string>
+#include <vector>
+
+#include "components/autofill/core/browser/autofill_profile_comparator.h"
+#include "components/payments/content/payment_request_spec.h"
+
+// Utility functions used for processing and filtering profiles.
+// TODO(tmartino): Remove dependency on PaymentRequestSpec and move to core.

[Mathieu, 2017/03/24 16:16:02]

If it's just for the three requestPayer* bool, I would do the change in this CL.
Android doesn't have the spec anyway, so it will be out-of-the-box usable. 

[tmartino, 2017/03/24 16:28:52]

One thing anthonyvd and I discussed was potentially extracting a Spec interface
into core--there's a lot of data encapsulated in that structure that's
potentially relevant to business logic that doesn't necessarily need any of the
Mojo stuff. Our existing Mojo-dependent class would implement the interface
without any further changes, and for Android and iOS we would essentially
implement a "dumb" version where the values are provided at construct-time.

[Mathieu, 2017/03/24 16:37:27]

I would use the booleans for now and re-evaluate later if there's a need for a
common Spec interface in core? That may be an interesting thing to do, but for
now iOS will benefit directly from this change if we use the booleans.

[tmartino, 2017/04/03 16:42:55]

Looking at iOS, and talking to mahmadi@, actually reaffirmed my faith in this
plan--we basically get a PaymentOptionsProvider implementation for free on iOS,
as the corresponding class already exists. I also got buy-in from sebsg@ for
using this approach on Android. I've updated this CL to patch in that CL and use
the class accordingly. This code will now be available on iOS immediately after
landing.

+
+namespace autofill {
+class AutofillProfile;
+}  // namespace autofill
+
+namespace payments {
+namespace profile_util {
+
+// Returns profiles for contact info, ordered by completeness and deduplicated.
+// |profiles| should be passed in order of frecency, and this order will be
+// preserved among equally-complete profiles. Deduplication here means that
+// profiles returned are excluded if they are a subset of a more complete or
+// more frecent profile. Completeness here refers only to the presence of the
+// fields requested per the request_payer_* fields in |spec|.
+std::vector<autofill::AutofillProfile*> FilterProfilesForContact(
+    const std::vector<autofill::AutofillProfile*>& profiles,
+    const std::string& app_locale,
+    PaymentRequestSpec* spec);
+
+// Helper class which evaluates profiles for similarity and completeness.
+class PaymentsProfileComparator : public autofill::AutofillProfileComparator {
+ public:
+  PaymentsProfileComparator(const std::string& app_locale,
+                            PaymentRequestSpec* spec);
+  ~PaymentsProfileComparator();
+
+  // Returns true iff all of the contact info in |sub| also appears in |super|.
+  // Only operates on fields requested in |spec|.
+  bool IsContactEqualOrSuperset(autofill::AutofillProfile* super,
+                                autofill::AutofillProfile* sub);
+
+  // Returns the number of contact fields requested in |spec| which are nonempty
+  // in |profile|.
+  int GetContactCompletenessScore(autofill::AutofillProfile* profile);
+
+  // Returns true every contact field requested in |spec| is nonempty in
+  // |profile|.
+  bool IsContactInfoComplete(autofill::AutofillProfile* profile);
+
+  // Comparison function suitable for sorting profiles by contact completeness
+  // score with std::sort.
+  bool CompareContactCompleteness(autofill::AutofillProfile* p1,

[Roger McFarlane (Chromium), 2017/03/24 18:23:16]

nit: this name doesn't really suggest a boolean return value to me... i'd expect
negative, 0, positive from a "Compare" func that lacks a relation in the name.

maybe IsMoreComplete(p1, p2)?

[tmartino, 2017/04/03 16:42:54]

Done.

+                                  autofill::AutofillProfile* p2);
+
+ private:
+  PaymentRequestSpec* spec_;
+};
+
+}  // namespace profile_util
+}  // namespace payments
+
+#endif  // COMPONENTS_PAYMENTS_CONTENT_PROFILE_UTIL_H_