views: fold layout_utils::CreatePanelLayout into GridLayout::CreatePanel

ui/views/layout/grid_layout.cc

Index: ui/views/layout/grid_layout.cc
diff --git a/ui/views/layout/grid_layout.cc b/ui/views/layout/grid_layout.cc
index 135fe19022c7677ba77bcae7900f4df595275cd1..efb781523b42e00bfa7227a5ff57f6caac8eb82f 100644
--- a/ui/views/layout/grid_layout.cc
+++ b/ui/views/layout/grid_layout.cc
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
 #include "base/memory/ptr_util.h"
 #include "ui/views/layout/layout_constants.h"
 #include "ui/views/view.h"
+#include "ui/views/views_delegate.h"
 #include "ui/views/window/dialog_delegate.h"
 
 namespace views {
@@ -651,8 +652,9 @@ GridLayout::~GridLayout() {
 // static
 GridLayout* GridLayout::CreatePanel(View* host) {
   GridLayout* layout = new GridLayout(host);
-  layout->SetInsets(kPanelVertMargin, kButtonHEdgeMarginNew,
-                    kPanelVertMargin, kButtonHEdgeMarginNew);
+  layout->SetInsets(ViewsDelegate::GetInstance()->GetInsetsMetric(
+      InsetsMetric::BUBBLE_DIALOG));

[Peter Kasting, 2017/03/29 03:39:11]

Did you choose to use BUBBLE_DIALOG because it was close to the desired
behavior, and the previous behavior is hard to duplicate with existing metrics?

I'm worried about the visible effects of this behavior change.  Can you take a
sample screenshot of a place this would affect?

Unless this is a concrete visual improvement, I'm inclined to suggest we add the
necessary plumbing to ViewsDelegate (e.g. another inset enum value) to duplicate
the old behavior.

+  host->SetLayoutManager(layout);

[Peter Kasting, 2017/03/29 03:39:11]

Can you also audit the existing CreatePanel() calls and remove all the
SetLayoutManager() calls that existed because this wasn't here?

(Were any places NOT doing SetLayoutManager()?)

   return layout;
 }