app_list search results relevance scores are clamped to [0, 1] range.

ui/app_list/search/mixer.cc

Index: ui/app_list/search/mixer.cc
diff --git a/ui/app_list/search/mixer.cc b/ui/app_list/search/mixer.cc
index 859b3839f47ba662faf31a7c269ecaf830289bd7..513efe18e8151aae1340ee6afa9af6d865c2a1eb 100644
--- a/ui/app_list/search/mixer.cc
+++ b/ui/app_list/search/mixer.cc
@@ -62,10 +62,13 @@ class Mixer::Group {
 
     for (const SearchProvider* provider : providers_) {
       for (SearchResult* result : provider->results()) {
-        DCHECK_GE(result->relevance(), 0.0);
-        DCHECK_LE(result->relevance(), 1.0);
         DCHECK(!result->id().empty());
 
+        // We cannot rely on providers to give relevance scores in the range
+        // [0.0, 1.0] (e.g., PeopleProvider directly gives values from the
+        // Google+ API). Clamp to that range.
+        double relevance = std::min(std::max(result->relevance(), 0.0), 1.0);

[calamity, 2015/02/09 03:52:28]

Precautionary? Or was this actually DCHECKing?

[Matt Giuca, 2015/02/09 04:05:29]

Precautionary.

(We can't have a DCHECK that relies on external services to behave.)

+
         double boost = boost_;
         KnownResults::const_iterator known_it =
             known_results.find(result->id());
@@ -93,7 +96,7 @@ class Mixer::Group {
         if (is_voice_query && result->voice_result())
           boost += 4.0;
 
-        results_.push_back(SortData(result, result->relevance() + boost));
+        results_.push_back(SortData(result, relevance + boost));
       }
     }