gfx::ShadowValue: offset is a Vector2d, not Point.

gfx::ShadowValue: offset is a Vector2d, not Point.

This was semantically incorrect; a Point represents a point in 2D space
whereas a Vector2d represents an offset. Therefore, 'offset' should be a
Vector2d.

BUG=None
TBR=sky@chromium.org

Committed: https://crrev.com/e8dffb6da90edde7f6aaaeb97f707b785aba8f3d
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#318202}

[Matt Giuca, 2015-02-24 06:36:16]

mgiuca@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ danakj@chromium.org

[danakj, 2015-02-24 17:26:56]

Using a Vector2d LGTM. You'll need OWNERS for all the things though.

https://codereview.chromium.org/884653003/diff/80001/ui/gfx/shadow_value_unit...
File ui/gfx/shadow_value_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/884653003/diff/80001/ui/gfx/shadow_value_unit...
ui/gfx/shadow_value_unittest.cc:20: Insets(), 0, {},
This indenting looks weird, did git cl format do this?

[Matt Giuca, 2015-02-24 23:04:20]

mgiuca@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ sky@chromium.org

[Matt Giuca, 2015-02-24 23:04:21]

I think since the rest of the changes are mechanical in nature, I will just TBR
sky@. Scott, let me know if you want more granular reviewers.

https://codereview.chromium.org/884653003/diff/80001/ui/gfx/shadow_value_unit...
File ui/gfx/shadow_value_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/884653003/diff/80001/ui/gfx/shadow_value_unit...
ui/gfx/shadow_value_unittest.cc:20: Insets(), 0, {},
It did. I don't know why it likes 1-space indents in this particular place.

Do you want me to revert the formatting (I don't think there is a presubmit
check for clang-format in this directory)? Or just accept what it's doing here?

[danakj, 2015-02-24 23:07:17]

https://codereview.chromium.org/884653003/diff/80001/ui/gfx/shadow_value_unit...
File ui/gfx/shadow_value_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/884653003/diff/80001/ui/gfx/shadow_value_unit...
ui/gfx/shadow_value_unittest.cc:20: Insets(), 0, {},
On 2015/02/24 23:04:21, Matt Giuca wrote:
> It did. I don't know why it likes 1-space indents in this particular place.
> 
> Do you want me to revert the formatting (I don't think there is a presubmit
> check for clang-format in this directory)? Or just accept what it's doing
here?

Accept it and file a bug please.

[Matt Giuca, 2015-02-25 04:34:42]

https://codereview.chromium.org/884653003/diff/80001/ui/gfx/shadow_value_unit...
File ui/gfx/shadow_value_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/884653003/diff/80001/ui/gfx/shadow_value_unit...
ui/gfx/shadow_value_unittest.cc:20: Insets(), 0, {},
> Accept it and file a bug please.

Done. (b/19503635)

I'm not sure why you want me to accept it, given that if the bug is fixed, this
file will be incorrectly formatted. But unless you change your mind, I'll do
that.

[danakj, 2015-02-25 19:04:24]

https://codereview.chromium.org/884653003/diff/80001/ui/gfx/shadow_value_unit...
File ui/gfx/shadow_value_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/884653003/diff/80001/ui/gfx/shadow_value_unit...
ui/gfx/shadow_value_unittest.cc:20: Insets(), 0, {},
On 2015/02/25 04:34:41, Matt Giuca wrote:
> > Accept it and file a bug please.
> 
> Done. (b/19503635)
> 
> I'm not sure why you want me to accept it, given that if the bug is fixed,
this
> file will be incorrectly formatted. But unless you change your mind, I'll do
> that.

Well, because otherwise other people who touch the file will have to go undo
clangformat too.

Maybe this file doesn't have enough traffic to warrent that though. I'm fine
with making it right and ignoring clang-format here too.

[Matt Giuca, 2015-02-26 03:18:28]

Patchset #6 (id:100001) has been deleted

[Matt Giuca, 2015-02-26 03:19:19]

https://codereview.chromium.org/884653003/diff/80001/ui/gfx/shadow_value_unit...
File ui/gfx/shadow_value_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/884653003/diff/80001/ui/gfx/shadow_value_unit...
ui/gfx/shadow_value_unittest.cc:20: Insets(), 0, {},
OK done. (I think it's especially good to not be doing big formatting changes on
an already-widespread CL).

[Matt Giuca, 2015-02-26 03:19:30]

The CQ bit was checked by mgiuca@chromium.org

[Matt Giuca, 2015-02-26 03:19:30]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from danakj@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/884653003/#ps120001
(title: "Revert formatting changes.")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-26 03:20:12]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/884653003/120001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-26 04:07:26]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-26 04:07:27]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_chromium_gn_rel on tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[Matt Giuca, 2015-02-26 04:23:35]

The CQ bit was checked by mgiuca@chromium.org

[Matt Giuca, 2015-02-26 04:23:35]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from danakj@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/884653003/#ps140001
(title: "Fix compile.")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-26 04:24:35]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/884653003/140001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-26 06:49:25]

Committed patchset #7 (id:140001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-26 06:49:57]

Patchset 7 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/e8dffb6da90edde7f6aaaeb97f707b785aba8f3d
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#318202}