CSS Parser: Implement parseRule

Source/core/css/parser/CSSParserTokenRange.cpp

Index: Source/core/css/parser/CSSParserTokenRange.cpp
diff --git a/Source/core/css/parser/CSSParserTokenRange.cpp b/Source/core/css/parser/CSSParserTokenRange.cpp
index 85a069d5d3c5d7737b5a7b0e4f99eff5173f75cd..5b6f168ee2eae55506741b3c05beebf113b50ecc 100644
--- a/Source/core/css/parser/CSSParserTokenRange.cpp
+++ b/Source/core/css/parser/CSSParserTokenRange.cpp
@@ -26,6 +26,24 @@ CSSParserTokenRange CSSParserTokenRange::makeSubRange(const CSSParserToken* firs
     return CSSParserTokenRange(first, last);
 }
 
+CSSParserTokenRange CSSParserTokenRange::consumeBlock()
+{
+    ASSERT(peek().blockType() == CSSParserToken::BlockStart);
+    const CSSParserToken* start = &peek() + 1;
+    unsigned nestingLevel = 0;
+    do {
+        const CSSParserToken& token = consume();
+        if (token.blockType() == CSSParserToken::BlockStart)
+            nestingLevel++;
+        else if (token.blockType() == CSSParserToken::BlockEnd)
+            nestingLevel--;
+    } while (nestingLevel && m_first < m_last);

[alancutter (OOO until 2018), 2014/12/29 05:10:22]

Would it be worse to have consumeComponentValue() return trailingNestingLevel?

[Timothy Loh, 2015/01/05 05:56:18]

I don't think it's any worse, but we're going to rewrite these before shipping
anyway and these will be super short then so I'm not too concerned about how
this looks right now.

+
+    if (nestingLevel)
+        return makeSubRange(start, m_first); // Ended at EOF
+    return makeSubRange(start, m_first - 1);
+}
+
 void CSSParserTokenRange::consumeComponentValue()
 {
     // FIXME: This is going to do multiple passes over large sections of a stylesheet.