Add support for enums within structs and interfaces to mojom.

Add support for enums within structs and interfaces to mojom.

BUG=320090
R=abarth@chromium.org, davemoore@chromium.org

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=243341

[Matt Perry, 2013-12-19 23:20:40]

abarth: js_templates/*, *.js
davemoore: everything else

I wasn't sure whether to put interface enums in the Proxy or the Stub, so I put
it in both. In C++ they're in the base class which is inherited by both; in JS
the enums are copied.

[DaveMoore, 2013-12-20 02:53:18]

cpp: lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/99623010/diff/1/mojo/public/bindings/sample/s...
File mojo/public/bindings/sample/sample_service_unittests.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/99623010/diff/1/mojo/public/bindings/sample/s...
mojo/public/bindings/sample/sample_service_unittests.cc:212: virtual void
Frobinate(const Foo& foo, int32_t baz,
Nit: I think there was a reason that we decided not to strongly type the enum
uses in parameters but it seems like it would be better.

[abarth-chromium, 2013-12-20 04:40:23]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/99623010/diff/1/mojo/public/bindings/generato...
File mojo/public/bindings/generators/js_templates/interface_definition.tmpl
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/99623010/diff/1/mojo/public/bindings/generato...
mojo/public/bindings/generators/js_templates/interface_definition.tmpl:52:
{{interface.name}}Stub.{{enum.name}} = {{interface.name}}Proxy.{{enum.name}};
Do we want these to be the same object or two different objects with the same
properties?  I would have expected the latter.

[darin (slow to review), 2013-12-20 05:12:44]

On 2013/12/20 02:53:18, DaveMoore wrote:
> cpp: lgtm
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/99623010/diff/1/mojo/public/bindings/sample/s...
> File mojo/public/bindings/sample/sample_service_unittests.cc (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/99623010/diff/1/mojo/public/bindings/sample/s...
> mojo/public/bindings/sample/sample_service_unittests.cc:212: virtual void
> Frobinate(const Foo& foo, int32_t baz,
> Nit: I think there was a reason that we decided not to strongly type the enum
> uses in parameters but it seems like it would be better.

Perhaps it has to do with enums used to specify bit fields that you can OR
together?

[darin (slow to review), 2013-12-20 05:13:35]

On 2013/12/20 05:12:44, darin wrote:
...
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/99623010/diff/1/mojo/public/bindings/sample/s...
> > mojo/public/bindings/sample/sample_service_unittests.cc:212: virtual void
> > Frobinate(const Foo& foo, int32_t baz,
> > Nit: I think there was a reason that we decided not to strongly type the
enum
> > uses in parameters but it seems like it would be better.
> 
> Perhaps it has to do with enums used to specify bit fields that you can OR
> together?

But, it seems users should be able to choose whether to use int32 or the enum
type name.

[Matt Perry, 2014-01-06 19:55:11]

https://codereview.chromium.org/99623010/diff/1/mojo/public/bindings/generato...
File mojo/public/bindings/generators/js_templates/interface_definition.tmpl
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/99623010/diff/1/mojo/public/bindings/generato...
mojo/public/bindings/generators/js_templates/interface_definition.tmpl:52:
{{interface.name}}Stub.{{enum.name}} = {{interface.name}}Proxy.{{enum.name}};
On 2013/12/20 04:40:24, abarth wrote:
> Do we want these to be the same object or two different objects with the same
> properties?  I would have expected the latter.

Is there a difference?

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-01-06 20:12:17]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/mpcomplete@chromium.org/99623010/110001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-01-06 20:34:58]

Retried try job too often on chromium_presubmit for step(s) presubmit
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/buildstatus?builder=chromium_p...

[Matt Perry, 2014-01-07 18:46:39]

Committed patchset #2 manually as r243341 (presubmit successful).