Make ScaledImageCache unit test less dependent on global state.

Make ScaledImageCache unit test less dependent on global state.

motivation:  The ASAN bot routinely trips this unit test.

Committed: https://skia.googlesource.com/skia/+/1d1795b199f216e17ff6b63f8c8c1f653666cb79

[hal.canary, 2014-07-18 14:55:43]

ptal

[tomhudson, 2014-07-18 15:02:44]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/401833002/diff/1/tests/ScaledImageCache.cpp
File tests/ScaledImageCache.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/401833002/diff/1/tests/ScaledImageCache.cpp#n...
tests/ScaledImageCache.cpp:28: static bool test_scaled_image_cache_useage() {
Nit: if we're cutting the comment in line 44 (see below), we could comment this
entire function with "Draw a scaled image, then return true if it's been
cached." - since 'test usage' isn't very descriptive.

https://codereview.chromium.org/401833002/diff/1/tests/ScaledImageCache.cpp#n...
tests/ScaledImageCache.cpp:44: // Check to see that the scaled bitmap is to be
found in the cache.
Nit: unnecessary comment? (I love comments, but this one seems to be restating a
single line of code without additional explanation - ++Hal for good naming of
the utility function.)

[hal.canary, 2014-07-18 16:06:53]

https://codereview.chromium.org/401833002/diff/1/tests/ScaledImageCache.cpp
File tests/ScaledImageCache.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/401833002/diff/1/tests/ScaledImageCache.cpp#n...
tests/ScaledImageCache.cpp:28: static bool test_scaled_image_cache_useage() {
On 2014/07/18 15:02:44, tomhudson wrote:
> Nit: if we're cutting the comment in line 44 (see below), we could comment
this
> entire function with "Draw a scaled image, then return true if it's been
> cached." - since 'test usage' isn't very descriptive.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/401833002/diff/1/tests/ScaledImageCache.cpp#n...
tests/ScaledImageCache.cpp:44: // Check to see that the scaled bitmap is to be
found in the cache.
On 2014/07/18 15:02:44, tomhudson wrote:
> Nit: unnecessary comment? (I love comments, but this one seems to be restating
a
> single line of code without additional explanation - ++Hal for good naming of
> the utility function.)

The comment predated the splitting out of the function.

Done

[hal.canary, 2014-07-18 16:06:55]

The CQ bit was checked by halcanary@google.com

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-18 16:07:17]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://skia-tree-status.appspot.com/cq/halcanary@google.com/401833002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-18 16:18:46]

Change committed as 1d1795b199f216e17ff6b63f8c8c1f653666cb79