Integrate Mojo JS validation bindings with the Router

Integrate Mojo JS validation bindings with the Router

Instad of generating exported validateFooRequest(),
validateFooResponse() methods, a pointer to a validation
functions is added to the generated Stub and Proxy class
prototypes. For example, given an interface Foo, with
client interface FooClient:

  FooStub.prototype.validators = [validateFooRequest];
  FooProxy.prototype.validators = [validateFooResponse];

Note that if interface Foo has no callbacks, then
FooProxy.prototype.validators is an empty array.

The router validates incoming messages using these functions 
and validateMessageHeader().

BUG=407181
Committed: https://crrev.com/08768f75fe85867797a826fc53f555d592cfda5c
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#292270}

[hansmuller, 2014-08-26 01:32:25]

hansmuller@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ yzshen@chromium.org

[hansmuller, 2014-08-26 21:17:36]

Patchset #1 (id:1) has been deleted

[hansmuller, 2014-08-26 21:22:48]

This change connects the router to the validation code.

[hansmuller, 2014-08-27 18:10:18]

I've removed the validators that were being generated for client interfaces per
our discussion.

[yzshen1, 2014-08-27 18:21:39]

LGTM with nits.

Thanks!

https://codereview.chromium.org/488173006/diff/60001/mojo/public/js/bindings/...
File mojo/public/js/bindings/router.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/488173006/diff/60001/mojo/public/js/bindings/...
mojo/public/js/bindings/router.js:60: Router.prototype.setValidators =
function(validators) {
It seems better to name it payload validators to indicate that it doesn't
include the header validator.

https://codereview.chromium.org/488173006/diff/60001/mojo/public/tools/bindin...
File
mojo/public/tools/bindings/generators/js_templates/interface_definition.tmpl
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/488173006/diff/60001/mojo/public/tools/bindin...
mojo/public/tools/bindings/generators/js_templates/interface_definition.tmpl:160:
{{interface.name}}Stub.prototype.validators = [
maybe we can name it validator (without 's') and just have a single value (or
null)?

https://codereview.chromium.org/488173006/diff/80001/mojo/public/js/bindings/...
File mojo/public/js/bindings/validation_unittests.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/488173006/diff/80001/mojo/public/js/bindings/...
mojo/public/js/bindings/validation_unittests.js:236:
testInterface.IntegrationTestInterface2Proxy.prototype.validators));
4 space indent?

[hansmuller, 2014-08-27 21:07:03]

Thanks for the feedback, I've made the suggested changes.

https://codereview.chromium.org/488173006/diff/60001/mojo/public/js/bindings/...
File mojo/public/js/bindings/router.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/488173006/diff/60001/mojo/public/js/bindings/...
mojo/public/js/bindings/router.js:60: Router.prototype.setValidators =
function(validators) {
On 2014/08/27 18:21:39, yzshen1 wrote:
> It seems better to name it payload validators to indicate that it doesn't
> include the header validator.

Good point.

https://codereview.chromium.org/488173006/diff/60001/mojo/public/tools/bindin...
File
mojo/public/tools/bindings/generators/js_templates/interface_definition.tmpl
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/488173006/diff/60001/mojo/public/tools/bindin...
mojo/public/tools/bindings/generators/js_templates/interface_definition.tmpl:160:
{{interface.name}}Stub.prototype.validators = [
On 2014/08/27 18:21:39, yzshen1 wrote:
> maybe we can name it validator (without 's') and just have a single value (or
> null)?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/488173006/diff/80001/mojo/public/js/bindings/...
File mojo/public/js/bindings/validation_unittests.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/488173006/diff/80001/mojo/public/js/bindings/...
mojo/public/js/bindings/validation_unittests.js:236:
testInterface.IntegrationTestInterface2Proxy.prototype.validators));
On 2014/08/27 18:21:39, yzshen1 wrote:
> 4 space indent?

Done.

[hansmuller, 2014-08-27 21:08:08]

The CQ bit was checked by hansmuller@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-27 21:09:39]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/hansmuller@chromium.org/488173006/100001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-27 23:09:06]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
The failing builders are:
  linux_chromium_chromeos_rel_swarming on tryserver.chromium.linux
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-27 23:45:34]

Committed patchset #5 (id:100001) as eb24425f70b5b0d26ee4e72cf22778d75fbb0c2a

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-10 02:55:43]

Patchset 5 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/08768f75fe85867797a826fc53f555d592cfda5c
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#292270}