JSONStringValueSerializer takes a StringPiece instead of std::string&.

JSONStringValueSerializer takes a StringPiece instead of std::string&.

This allows callers to pass a char* (string literal) or StringPiece
(lightweight substring) without having to explicitly construct a string
object.

Refactored the implementation to avoid an ugly const_cast and Boolean to
avoid mutating a const pointer. Updated tests to use char* literals, and
added some new tests to test the new edge cases.

BUG=455068
Committed: https://crrev.com/a82ce4efc2cfa3812b96e22b5d3a68f915c7fbfb
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#314728}

[Matt Giuca, 2015-02-04 03:52:47]

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

[Matt Giuca, 2015-02-04 03:52:48]

Hi again,

This is based on top of https://codereview.chromium.org/889303004 which I also
sent to you.

[rvargas (doing something else), 2015-02-04 21:04:49]

lgtm

This is an improvement, but have you considered removing the deserialization
method from this class? I think the interface is overly complicated by
attempting to deal with both things and the benefit of a having an object to
deserialize is very small.

The downside is having to update the callers :(

[Matt Giuca, 2015-02-04 23:12:18]

You mean splitting the class into JSONStringValueSerializer and
JSONStringValueDeserializer?

Sounds reasonable (I'm pretty sure no client is using this for both
serialization and deserialization) but I don't have time to do the work (this is
just scratching a small itch).

[rvargas (doing something else), 2015-02-04 23:35:53]

On 2015/02/04 23:12:18, Matt Giuca wrote:
> You mean splitting the class into JSONStringValueSerializer and
> JSONStringValueDeserializer?
> 
> Sounds reasonable (I'm pretty sure no client is using this for both
> serialization and deserialization) but I don't have time to do the work (this
is
> just scratching a small itch).

Yes, something like that. Maybe we should file a bug and hope someone gets to
it.

[Matt Giuca, 2015-02-04 23:47:33]

Done: http://crbug.com/455453

[Matt Giuca, 2015-02-05 01:48:34]

The CQ bit was checked by mgiuca@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-05 01:49:28]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/895913004/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-05 03:03:11]

Committed patchset #1 (id:1)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-05 03:04:25]

Patchset 1 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/a82ce4efc2cfa3812b96e22b5d3a68f915c7fbfb
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#314728}