Use factory method to create VideoCaptureDeviceFactory .

Use factory method to create VideoCaptureDeviceFactory .

Cleaner code with less ifdefs.

Committed: https://crrev.com/289116483a8f2668dca75a78e0e1364d09943885
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#305398}

[ostap, 2014-11-13 21:42:34]

sl.ostapenko@samsung.com changed reviewers:
+ perkj@chromium.org

[perkj_chrome, 2014-11-14 13:33:59]

perkj@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ mcasas@chromium.org

[perkj_chrome, 2014-11-14 13:34:00]

lgtm

please remove the line bug= if there is no bug number.

mcasas, do you have any comments?

[ostap, 2014-11-19 19:34:58]

On 2014/11/14 13:34:00, perkj wrote:
> lgtm
> 
> please remove the line bug= if there is no bug number.
> 
> mcasas, do you have any comments?

mcasas, ping
Any comment on this?

Thanks

[mcasas, 2014-11-19 22:25:33]

Couple of comments.

https://codereview.chromium.org/720043003/diff/20001/media/video/capture/linu...
File media/video/capture/linux/video_capture_device_factory_linux.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/720043003/diff/20001/media/video/capture/linu...
media/video/capture/linux/video_capture_device_factory_linux.cc:198: // static.
Remove dot

https://codereview.chromium.org/720043003/diff/20001/media/video/capture/mac/...
File media/video/capture/mac/video_capture_device_factory_mac.mm (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/720043003/diff/20001/media/video/capture/mac/...
media/video/capture/mac/video_capture_device_factory_mac.mm:207: // static.
Remove dot

https://codereview.chromium.org/720043003/diff/20001/media/video/capture/vide...
File media/video/capture/video_capture_device_factory.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/720043003/diff/20001/media/video/capture/vide...
media/video/capture/video_capture_device_factory.cc:57: return new
VideoCaptureDeviceFactory();
Hmm this should never happen, should it? The only
reason VCDF is not pure abstract is because of the
ThreadChecker, so it should never be instantiated.

I'd say use here a NOTIMPLEMENTED() and make sure
all tests pass.

[ostap, 2014-11-20 15:47:17]

https://codereview.chromium.org/720043003/diff/20001/media/video/capture/linu...
File media/video/capture/linux/video_capture_device_factory_linux.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/720043003/diff/20001/media/video/capture/linu...
media/video/capture/linux/video_capture_device_factory_linux.cc:198: // static.
On 2014/11/19 22:25:32, mcasas wrote:
> Remove dot

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/720043003/diff/20001/media/video/capture/mac/...
File media/video/capture/mac/video_capture_device_factory_mac.mm (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/720043003/diff/20001/media/video/capture/mac/...
media/video/capture/mac/video_capture_device_factory_mac.mm:207: // static.
On 2014/11/19 22:25:32, mcasas wrote:
> Remove dot

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/720043003/diff/20001/media/video/capture/vide...
File media/video/capture/video_capture_device_factory.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/720043003/diff/20001/media/video/capture/vide...
media/video/capture/video_capture_device_factory.cc:57: return new
VideoCaptureDeviceFactory();
On 2014/11/19 22:25:32, mcasas wrote:
> Hmm this should never happen, should it? The only
> reason VCDF is not pure abstract is because of the
> ThreadChecker, so it should never be instantiated.
> 
> I'd say use here a NOTIMPLEMENTED() and make sure
> all tests pass.

Done.

[ostap, 2014-11-24 03:41:29]

On 2014/11/20 15:47:17, ostap wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/720043003/diff/20001/media/video/capture/linu...
> File media/video/capture/linux/video_capture_device_factory_linux.cc (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/720043003/diff/20001/media/video/capture/linu...
> media/video/capture/linux/video_capture_device_factory_linux.cc:198: //
static.
> On 2014/11/19 22:25:32, mcasas wrote:
> > Remove dot
> 
> Done.
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/720043003/diff/20001/media/video/capture/mac/...
> File media/video/capture/mac/video_capture_device_factory_mac.mm (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/720043003/diff/20001/media/video/capture/mac/...
> media/video/capture/mac/video_capture_device_factory_mac.mm:207: // static.
> On 2014/11/19 22:25:32, mcasas wrote:
> > Remove dot
> 
> Done.
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/720043003/diff/20001/media/video/capture/vide...
> File media/video/capture/video_capture_device_factory.cc (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/720043003/diff/20001/media/video/capture/vide...
> media/video/capture/video_capture_device_factory.cc:57: return new
> VideoCaptureDeviceFactory();
> On 2014/11/19 22:25:32, mcasas wrote:
> > Hmm this should never happen, should it? The only
> > reason VCDF is not pure abstract is because of the
> > ThreadChecker, so it should never be instantiated.
> > 
> > I'd say use here a NOTIMPLEMENTED() and make sure
> > all tests pass.
> 
> Done.

mcasas, ping
Can I land this now?

Thanks

[mcasas, 2014-11-24 03:43:10]

lgtm

[ostap, 2014-11-24 03:48:08]

The CQ bit was checked by sl.ostapenko@samsung.com

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-11-24 03:48:26]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/720043003/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-11-24 04:33:39]

Committed patchset #3 (id:40001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-11-24 04:34:22]

Patchset 3 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/289116483a8f2668dca75a78e0e1364d09943885
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#305398}