Expose well-known Symbols to C++ API.

Expose well-known Symbols to C++ API.

BUG=341423
LOG=Y
R=arv@chromium.org, dcarney@chromium.org, rossberg@chromium.org

Committed: https://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=23196

[arv (Not doing code reviews), 2014-08-19 02:02:25]

I'm not an OWNER. Adding some owners.

https://codereview.chromium.org/483173002/diff/1/src/api.cc
File src/api.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/483173002/diff/1/src/api.cc#newcode6199
src/api.cc:6199: i::Handle<i::String> part =
i_isolate->factory()->for_intern_string();
Maybe it is time to refactor this into a function that is used by the 3 API
functions?

[yhirano, 2014-08-19 02:17:56]

Thanks for the review!

https://codereview.chromium.org/483173002/diff/1/src/api.cc
File src/api.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/483173002/diff/1/src/api.cc#newcode6199
src/api.cc:6199: i::Handle<i::String> part =
i_isolate->factory()->for_intern_string();
On 2014/08/19 02:02:25, arv wrote:
> Maybe it is time to refactor this into a function that is used by the 3 API
> functions?

Done.

[arv (Not doing code reviews), 2014-08-19 02:58:16]

LGTM but let some API owner have a look at this as well.

[dcarney, 2014-08-19 08:13:25]

lgtm, assuming this is something we want to expose.  I don't see why it would be
particularly.  Andreas?

[rossberg, 2014-08-19 10:46:14]

NOT LGTM

Exposing this function would allow embedders to create new internal symbols and
clobber logical names from this space, which might be in conflict with our own
(present or future) uses. I intentionally did not expose this functionality, and
introduced the separate ForApi registry instead to be used by embedders.

To grant access to the JS-defined set of internal symbols, we should probably
just export them directly, perhaps simply mirroring the JS-side interface.
(Alternatively, ForInternal could allow only well-known names to pass, but I
don't think that's a more elegant solution.)

[yhirano, 2014-08-19 11:38:17]

On 2014/08/19 10:46:14, rossberg wrote:
> NOT LGTM
> 
> Exposing this function would allow embedders to create new internal symbols
and
> clobber logical names from this space, which might be in conflict with our own
> (present or future) uses. I intentionally did not expose this functionality,
and
> introduced the separate ForApi registry instead to be used by embedders.
> 
> To grant access to the JS-defined set of internal symbols, we should probably
> just export them directly, perhaps simply mirroring the JS-side interface.
> (Alternatively, ForInternal could allow only well-known names to pass, but I
> don't think that's a more elegant solution.)

Done.

[rossberg, 2014-08-19 11:46:26]

LGTM, will land

[rossberg, 2014-08-19 12:08:54]

Committed patchset #3 manually as 23196 (presubmit successful).