Index: base/allocator/allocator_extension.cc |
diff --git a/base/allocator/allocator_extension.cc b/base/allocator/allocator_extension.cc |
index 7ae11da3e301121f328b265dac2bf489d3c5b52e..d19f51d78fc03ee55e967ae3ebd3a620ef8ace12 100644 |
--- a/base/allocator/allocator_extension.cc |
+++ b/base/allocator/allocator_extension.cc |
@@ -9,6 +9,14 @@ |
namespace base { |
namespace allocator { |
+bool GetProperty(const char* name, size_t* value) { |
+ if (thunks::GetPropertyFunction* get_property_function = |
+ base::allocator::thunks::GetGetPropertyFunction()) |
jar (doing other things)
2012/08/11 03:39:46
nit: No reason to put a declaration in an if.... s
alexeif
2012/08/11 11:19:55
I don't like assignments inside 'if' either. I jus
|
+ return get_property_function(name, value); |
+ else |
jar (doing other things)
2012/08/11 03:39:46
nit: no need for else... as you're returning.
alexeif
2012/08/11 11:19:55
Done.
|
+ return false; |
+} |
+ |
void GetStats(char* buffer, int buffer_length) { |
DCHECK_GT(buffer_length, 0); |
if (thunks::GetStatsFunction* get_stats_function = |
@@ -24,6 +32,13 @@ void ReleaseFreeMemory() { |
release_free_memory_function(); |
} |
+void SetGetPropertyFunction( |
+ thunks::GetPropertyFunction* get_property_function) { |
+ DCHECK_EQ(base::allocator::thunks::GetGetPropertyFunction(), |
+ reinterpret_cast<thunks::GetPropertyFunction*>(NULL)); |
+ base::allocator::thunks::SetGetPropertyFunction(get_property_function); |
+} |
+ |
void SetGetStatsFunction(thunks::GetStatsFunction* get_stats_function) { |
DCHECK_EQ(base::allocator::thunks::GetGetStatsFunction(), |
reinterpret_cast<thunks::GetStatsFunction*>(NULL)); |