Cookie commands for the webdriver protocol

chrome/test/webdriver/automation.h

Index: chrome/test/webdriver/automation.h
diff --git a/chrome/test/webdriver/automation.h b/chrome/test/webdriver/automation.h
index 10ab4a1340c54134aeb5acde961a8488d55939ef..386ef9b3c0b62d6c6417deedbfc83eb2e3c47d3c 100644
--- a/chrome/test/webdriver/automation.h
+++ b/chrome/test/webdriver/automation.h
@@ -42,7 +42,14 @@ class Automation : private UITestBase {
   void GoBack(bool* success);
   void Reload(bool* success);
   void GetURL(std::string* url, bool* success);
+  void GetGURL(GURL* gurl, bool* success);
   void GetTabTitle(std::string* tab_title, bool* success);
+  void GetCookies(const GURL& gurl, std::string* cookies, bool* success);

[John Grabowski, 2011/02/14 21:59:06]

Why don't you like return values?
Seems you could have all these methods return the success bool.  

[kkania, 2011/02/14 22:47:08]

We don't return bool because these methods are called by posting a
NewRunnableMethod task on the session thread. See session.cc. Alternative:

Session::GetCookies(...) {
  session_thread->PostTask(NewRunnableMethod(&Session::GetCookiesOnSThread))
}

Session::GetCookiesOnSThread(bool* success) {
*success = automation->GetCookies(...)
}

bool Automation::GetCookies(...) { ... }

I do not think it is worthwhile to adopt this alternative, as it requires
writing an extra wrapper in Session. Please let me know if you think otherwise.

[John Grabowski, 2011/02/14 22:57:09]

Seems completely reasonable.
How about a comment at the class declaration stating as such?  

+  void GetCookieByName(const GURL& gurl, const std::string& cookie_name,
+                       std::string* cookie, bool* success);
+  void DeleteCookie(const GURL& gurl, const std::string& cookie_name,
+                    bool* success);
+  void SetCookie(const GURL& gurl, const std::string& cookie, bool* success);
 
  private:
   scoped_refptr<BrowserProxy> browser_;