MessageReceiver must handle Message and not MessageWithHeader.

MessageReceiver must handle Message and not MessageWithHeader.

MessageReceiver were given MessageWithHeader. This is incorrect as this
force validation code at the Connector level, while Connector should not
impose any format on the message it receives.

R=ppi@chromium.org

Committed: https://crrev.com/65eb66aa78631a7d633cf32e175f45ccdfda0b55
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#292888}

[ppi, 2014-09-01 14:33:11]

A few remarks regarding naming. These are about existing code, so, as discussed
in person, we definitely can do the renames in a separate CL.

This lgtm.

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/android/javatests/src/o...
File
mojo/android/javatests/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/BindingsTestUtils.java
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/android/javatests/src/o...
mojo/android/javatests/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/BindingsTestUtils.java:50:
*      MessageReceiver)
nit: would it fit in the previous line now?

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/public/java/bindings/sr...
File mojo/public/java/bindings/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/Message.java
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/public/java/bindings/sr...
mojo/public/java/bindings/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/Message.java:14: * A
raw message to be sent/received from a {@link MessagePipeHandle}.
+= ' Note that this can contain any data, not necessarily a Mojo message with a
proper header. See also {@link MessageWithHeader} and {@link SimpleMessage}.'

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/public/java/bindings/sr...
mojo/public/java/bindings/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/Message.java:31: public
MessageWithHeader withHeader();
as this is essentially casting, how about "asMojoMessage()"?

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/public/java/bindings/sr...
File
mojo/public/java/bindings/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/MessageWithHeader.java
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/public/java/bindings/sr...
mojo/public/java/bindings/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/MessageWithHeader.java:17:
public class MessageWithHeader implements Message {
As discussed in person, I'd suggest to call this MojoMessage, to express that
this is a message (MessagePipe concept) that happens to be a Mojo message (ie.
it has a header and a payload).

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/public/java/bindings/sr...
File mojo/public/java/bindings/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/SimpleMessage.java
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/public/java/bindings/sr...
mojo/public/java/bindings/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/SimpleMessage.java:18:
public final class SimpleMessage implements Message {
As discussed, maybe let's call it PlainMessage? Or, even better, MessageImpl?

This gives us the entities:
- Message - general-purpose interface
- MessageImpl - general-purpose implementation
- MojoMessage - implementation that enforces mojo message format

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/public/java/bindings/sr...
mojo/public/java/bindings/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/SimpleMessage.java:81:
public static int readAndDispatchMessage(MessagePipeHandle handle,
MessageReceiver receiver) {
This seems to be called only in Connector, can this be a private static method
in Connector?

[qsr, 2014-09-01 15:55:40]

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/android/javatests/src/o...
File
mojo/android/javatests/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/BindingsTestUtils.java
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/android/javatests/src/o...
mojo/android/javatests/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/BindingsTestUtils.java:50:
*      MessageReceiver)
On 2014/09/01 14:33:10, ppi wrote:
> nit: would it fit in the previous line now?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/public/java/bindings/sr...
File mojo/public/java/bindings/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/Message.java
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/public/java/bindings/sr...
mojo/public/java/bindings/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/Message.java:14: * A
raw message to be sent/received from a {@link MessagePipeHandle}.
On 2014/09/01 14:33:11, ppi wrote:
> += ' Note that this can contain any data, not necessarily a Mojo message with
a
> proper header. See also {@link MessageWithHeader} and {@link SimpleMessage}.'

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/public/java/bindings/sr...
mojo/public/java/bindings/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/Message.java:31: public
MessageWithHeader withHeader();
On 2014/09/01 14:33:11, ppi wrote:
> as this is essentially casting, how about "asMojoMessage()"?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/public/java/bindings/sr...
File
mojo/public/java/bindings/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/MessageWithHeader.java
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/public/java/bindings/sr...
mojo/public/java/bindings/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/MessageWithHeader.java:17:
public class MessageWithHeader implements Message {
On 2014/09/01 14:33:11, ppi wrote:
> As discussed in person, I'd suggest to call this MojoMessage, to express that
> this is a message (MessagePipe concept) that happens to be a Mojo message (ie.
> it has a header and a payload).

 Agreed. But I'll do this in followup CL because of CL in flight CLs.

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/public/java/bindings/sr...
File mojo/public/java/bindings/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/SimpleMessage.java
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/public/java/bindings/sr...
mojo/public/java/bindings/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/SimpleMessage.java:18:
public final class SimpleMessage implements Message {
On 2014/09/01 14:33:11, ppi wrote:
> As discussed, maybe let's call it PlainMessage? Or, even better, MessageImpl?
> 
> This gives us the entities:
> - Message - general-purpose interface
> - MessageImpl - general-purpose implementation
> - MojoMessage - implementation that enforces mojo message format

 MessageImpl doesn't tell us anything about what kind of Message it is. I prefer
PlainMessage if that's fine with you...

https://codereview.chromium.org/525383002/diff/1/mojo/public/java/bindings/sr...
mojo/public/java/bindings/src/org/chromium/mojo/bindings/SimpleMessage.java:81:
public static int readAndDispatchMessage(MessagePipeHandle handle,
MessageReceiver receiver) {
On 2014/09/01 14:33:11, ppi wrote:
> This seems to be called only in Connector, can this be a private static method
> in Connector?

- I really want to test this method, so at least it needs to be package
protected.

[qsr, 2014-09-01 15:56:43]

The CQ bit was checked by qsr@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-01 15:57:10]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/qsr@chromium.org/525383002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-01 16:51:26]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
The failing builders are:
  win_chromium_x64_rel_swarming on tryserver.chromium.win
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_x64_...)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-01 17:32:10]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001) as f2c5dac7ba82889ce9567ea21e130ad1d7c87b99

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-10 03:17:22]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/65eb66aa78631a7d633cf32e175f45ccdfda0b55
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#292888}