[Extensions] Update DeclarativeApiTest.DeclarativeApi

[Extensions] Update DeclarativeApiTest.DeclarativeApi

The DeclarativeApiTest.DeclarativeApi test exercises calling invalid
invocations of [declarativeEvent].getRules() and removeRules(). However,
the "invalid" invocations they have been using simply omit the first
parameter, which is a filter. In the documentation and the schema, this
first parameter is listed as *optional*, and in extension APIs, omitted
optional parameters are allowed. Thus, this is contradictory.

This happens because the get/removeRules functions are defined in
event.js and take two named parameters, using those for validation,
rather than validating on the `arguments` property. Native bindings
actually do the right thing here, and allow the invocation.

Update the test to use truly invalid invocations for the invalid
invocations tests, and add a (disabled) test for using getRules with an
omitted filter.

BUG=733764
BUG=653596
Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2940133002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#479846}
Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/df6434db4fb6f58af26c25696f19332853938288

[Devlin, 2017-06-15 19:18:30]

The CQ bit was checked by rdevlin.cronin@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-15 19:19:17]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch.

Follow status at:
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-15 20:41:49]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-15 20:41:50]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[Devlin, 2017-06-15 20:42:51]

rdevlin.cronin@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ lazyboy@chromium.org

[Devlin, 2017-06-15 20:42:51]

lazyboy@, mind taking a look?

Good news - native bindings are catching bugs we never knew we had. :)

jbroman@, FYI.

[lazyboy, 2017-06-15 21:15:03]

lgtm

[Devlin, 2017-06-15 21:29:56]

The CQ bit was checked by rdevlin.cronin@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-15 21:30:28]

CQ is trying da patch.

Follow status at:
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-15 21:35:11]

CQ is committing da patch.

Bot data: {"patchset_id": 1, "attempt_start_ts": 1497562196600390, "parent_rev":
"f73ee9f71d87e3deb732db3b9ebe16a8c8d23821", "commit_rev":
"df6434db4fb6f58af26c25696f19332853938288"}

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-15 21:35:22]

Description was changed from

==========
[Extensions] Update DeclarativeApiTest.DeclarativeApi

The DeclarativeApiTest.DeclarativeApi test exercises calling invalid
invocations of [declarativeEvent].getRules() and removeRules(). However,
the "invalid" invocations they have been using simply omit the first
parameter, which is a filter. In the documentation and the schema, this
first parameter is listed as *optional*, and in extension APIs, omitted
optional parameters are allowed. Thus, this is contradictory.

This happens because the get/removeRules functions are defined in
event.js and take two named parameters, using those for validation,
rather than validating on the `arguments` property. Native bindings
actually do the right thing here, and allow the invocation.

Update the test to use truly invalid invocations for the invalid
invocations tests, and add a (disabled) test for using getRules with an
omitted filter.

BUG=733764
BUG=653596
==========

to

==========
[Extensions] Update DeclarativeApiTest.DeclarativeApi

The DeclarativeApiTest.DeclarativeApi test exercises calling invalid
invocations of [declarativeEvent].getRules() and removeRules(). However,
the "invalid" invocations they have been using simply omit the first
parameter, which is a filter. In the documentation and the schema, this
first parameter is listed as *optional*, and in extension APIs, omitted
optional parameters are allowed. Thus, this is contradictory.

This happens because the get/removeRules functions are defined in
event.js and take two named parameters, using those for validation,
rather than validating on the `arguments` property. Native bindings
actually do the right thing here, and allow the invocation.

Update the test to use truly invalid invocations for the invalid
invocations tests, and add a (disabled) test for using getRules with an
omitted filter.

BUG=733764
BUG=653596

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2940133002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#479846}
Committed:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/df6434db4fb6f58af26c25696f19...
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-15 21:35:23]

Committed patchset #1 (id:1) as
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/df6434db4fb6f58af26c25696f19...