Split Persistent into Persistent and UniquePersistent

Split Persistent into Persistent and UniquePersistent

R=svenpanne@chromium.org

BUG=

Committed: https://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=18093

[dcarney, 2013-11-26 11:28:43]

ptal

the UniquePersistent code is taken from
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#chromium/src/base/memory/scoped...

we may need a few extra features such as swap() and PassAs() to be able to
replace UnsafePersistent everywhere in chrome and blink

@haraken: do you need any additional functionality immediately?

[haraken, 2013-11-26 11:33:59]

On 2013/11/26 11:28:43, dcarney wrote:
> ptal
> 
> the UniquePersistent code is taken from
>
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#chromium/src/base/memory/scoped...
> 
> we may need a few extra features such as swap() and PassAs() to be able to
> replace UnsafePersistent everywhere in chrome and blink
> 
> @haraken: do you need any additional functionality immediately?

The goal is to remove UnsafePersistent (and add more functionality to V8
bindings). I'm not quite sure what API is necessary at this point but I'm a fan
of landing things incrementally :)

[Sven Panne, 2013-11-27 09:17:11]

LGTM, but (as discussed offline) please add a warning comment that the actual
class hierarchy might be changed/simplified in the future.

[dcarney, 2013-11-27 09:30:56]

Committed patchset #2 manually as r18093 (presubmit successful).

[Paweł Hajdan Jr., 2013-12-20 11:47:51]

Drive-by with a question.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/88013002/diff/20001/include/v8.h
File include/v8.h (left):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/88013002/diff/20001/include/v8.h#oldco...
include/v8.h:386: template<class M>
Is this change backward-compatible? It seems that V8_DEPRECATED could be used
for the old, templated New.

[Sven Panne, 2013-12-20 11:49:50]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/88013002/diff/20001/include/v8.h
File include/v8.h (left):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/88013002/diff/20001/include/v8.h#oldco...
include/v8.h:386: template<class M>
On 2013/12/20 11:47:51, Paweł Hajdan Jr. wrote:
> Is this change backward-compatible? It seems that V8_DEPRECATED could be used
> for the old, templated New.

As mentioned in another CL comment, we aim for a deprecation-free next release
and intentionally don't care about backward-compatibility right now.