Abstract away some of the complexity in CSSSelectorWatch by using HashCountedSet

Abstract away some of the complexity in CSSSelectorWatch by using HashCountedSet

Abstract away some of the complexity in CSSSelectorWatch by using HashCountedSet data
structure instead of handling the counting manually and use a HashMap.
WTF's HashCountedSet exists exactly for this kind of use cases and it makes the code
a bit simpler.

R=eseidel

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=161838

[eseidel, 2013-11-11 22:24:31]

https://codereview.chromium.org/69543002/diff/1/Source/core/dom/CSSSelectorWa...
File Source/core/dom/CSSSelectorWatch.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/69543002/diff/1/Source/core/dom/CSSSelectorWa...
Source/core/dom/CSSSelectorWatch.cpp:98: if
(m_addedSelectors.contains(selector))
Would itr = find(); remove(itr); be "faster"?  Do we care?

[eseidel, 2013-11-11 22:24:37]

lgtm

[Inactive, 2013-11-11 22:47:54]

On 2013/11/11 22:24:31, eseidel wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/69543002/diff/1/Source/core/dom/CSSSelectorWa...
> File Source/core/dom/CSSSelectorWatch.cpp (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/69543002/diff/1/Source/core/dom/CSSSelectorWa...
> Source/core/dom/CSSSelectorWatch.cpp:98: if
> (m_addedSelectors.contains(selector))
> Would itr = find(); remove(itr); be "faster"?  Do we care?

Yes it would be faster. I actually resisted the temptation of updating it in my
patch since it was not strictly related. However, I am happy to do that in a
separate patch.

I don't know hot this code path is though.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-11-11 22:50:29]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/ch.dumez@samsung.com/69543002/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-11-12 17:45:59]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/ch.dumez@samsung.com/69543002/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-11-12 18:30:55]

Change committed as 161838