Introduce DEFINE_ANIMATABLE_VALUE_TYPE_CASTS to replace manual toFoo() for animatable value

Source/core/animation/AnimatableRepeatable.h

 /*
  * Copyright (C) 2013 Google Inc. All rights reserved.
  *
  * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
  * modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are
  * met:
  *
  *     * Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
  * notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
  *     * Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above
@@ skipping 54 matching lines @@
     Vector<RefPtr<AnimatableValue> > m_values;
 
 private:
     virtual PassRefPtr<AnimatableValue> interpolateTo(const AnimatableValue*, double fraction) const OVERRIDE;
     virtual PassRefPtr<AnimatableValue> addWith(const AnimatableValue*) const OVERRIDE;
 
     virtual AnimatableType type() const OVERRIDE { return TypeRepeatable; }
     virtual bool equalTo(const AnimatableValue*) const OVERRIDE;
 };
 
-inline const AnimatableRepeatable* toAnimatableRepeatable(const AnimatableValue* value)
-{
-    // FIXME: Use a better typing system for AnimatableValues that doesn't require ugliness like this to support subclassing.
-    ASSERT_WITH_SECURITY_IMPLICATION(value && (value->isRepeatable() || value->isStrokeDasharrayList()));
-    return static_cast<const AnimatableRepeatable*>(value);
-}
+DEFINE_TYPE_CASTS(AnimatableRepeatable, AnimatableValue, value, (value->isRepeatable() || value->isStrokeDasharrayList()), (value.isRepeatable() || value.isStrokeDasharrayList()));

[gyuyoung-inactive, 2013/10/21 09:33:55]

Unfortunately, current DEFINE_ANIMATABLE_VALUE_TYPE_CASTS can't support multiple
assertion conditions. So, in this case, I uses DEFINE_TYPE_CASTS directly. I
wonder how do you think about this usage.

[tkent, 2013/10/21 21:48:06]

Using generic DEFINE_TYPE_CASTS is reasonable.

 
 } // namespace WebCore
 
 #endif // AnimatableRepeatable_h