Make ExtensionFunction::ArgumentList (PKA MultipleArguments) take a scoped_ptr

Make ExtensionFunction::ArgumentList (PKA MultipleArguments) take a scoped_ptr
rather than a raw pointer, because it plays better with the JSON schema compiler
generated code. Also add a TwoArguments method, and rename SingleArgument to
OneArgument to be consistent with that.

BUG=365732
R=rockot@chromium.org

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=271757

[not at google - send to devlin, 2014-05-19 20:11:26]

WDYT, too egregious? The reason I make the "Single" --> "One" naming change is
so it was consistent with "Two" but I don't feel strongly. The reason I made the
"Multiple" to "List" was for similar reasons, and feel similarly strongly. I
fear it's rather egregious.

[Ken Rockot(use gerrit already), 2014-05-19 22:19:29]

On 2014/05/19 20:11:26, kalman wrote:
> WDYT, too egregious? The reason I make the "Single" --> "One" naming change is
> so it was consistent with "Two" but I don't feel strongly. The reason I made
the
> "Multiple" to "List" was for similar reasons, and feel similarly strongly. I
> fear it's rather egregious.

I like OneArgument for consistency with TwoArguments.

My initial reaction to ArgumentList was to recoil in horror, but after some more
consideration I don't have a better name for it. LGTM.

[not at google - send to devlin, 2014-05-19 23:24:54]

The CQ bit was checked by kalman@chromium.org

[not at google - send to devlin, 2014-05-19 23:24:56]

On 2014/05/19 22:19:29, Ken Rockot wrote:
> On 2014/05/19 20:11:26, kalman wrote:
> > WDYT, too egregious? The reason I make the "Single" --> "One" naming change
is
> > so it was consistent with "Two" but I don't feel strongly. The reason I made
> the
> > "Multiple" to "List" was for similar reasons, and feel similarly strongly. I
> > fear it's rather egregious.
> 
> I like OneArgument for consistency with TwoArguments.
> 
> My initial reaction to ArgumentList was to recoil in horror, but after some
more
> consideration I don't have a better name for it. LGTM.

:)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-19 23:25:48]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/kalman@chromium.org/291453002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-20 04:19:51]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
Please consider checking whether the failures are real,
and report flakes to chrome-troopers@google.com.
The failing builders are:
  mac_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/mac_chromium_rel/buil...)
  win_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win_chromium_rel/buil...)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-20 04:25:19]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-20 04:25:19]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  mac_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/mac_chromium_rel/buil...)

[not at google - send to devlin, 2014-05-20 18:17:39]

The CQ bit was checked by kalman@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-20 18:18:37]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/kalman@chromium.org/291453002/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-20 21:31:52]

Change committed as 271757