Moving Chrome code from using WebFrame::name to WebFrame::uniqueName

Moving Chrome code from using WebFrame::name to WebFrame::uniqueName

BUG=145099
Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=154246

[nasko, 2012-08-27 23:42:57]

Hi Adam and Brett,
I'm removing calls to WebFrame::name from Chrome, as a follow up to
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=93127. Can you please review this
change?
Thanks,
Nasko

[abarth-chromium, 2012-08-27 23:44:38]

LGTM

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10879105/diff/1/chrome/renderer/frame_...
File chrome/renderer/frame_sniffer.cc (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10879105/diff/1/chrome/renderer/frame_...
chrome/renderer/frame_sniffer.cc:35: return frame->uniqueName() == frame_name_;
Should we rename frame_name_ to unique_frame_name_ ?

[nasko, 2012-08-28 00:02:34]

Good point on the member name. Fixed.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10879105/diff/1/chrome/renderer/frame_...
File chrome/renderer/frame_sniffer.cc (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10879105/diff/1/chrome/renderer/frame_...
chrome/renderer/frame_sniffer.cc:35: return frame->uniqueName() == frame_name_;
On 2012/08/27 23:44:38, abarth wrote:
> Should we rename frame_name_ to unique_frame_name_ ?

Done.

[nasko, 2012-08-28 22:06:48]

Brett,
Can you review this change in the next day or so? It is just a replacement of
older API call with newer one.
Thanks in advance,
Nasko

[brettw, 2012-08-29 06:55:16]

overloaded, please find another reviewe

[nasko, 2012-08-29 14:50:21]

Including jam@ and tony@ for OWNERS review for chrome and webkit respectively.

[jam, 2012-08-29 15:11:26]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/10879105/diff/5001/chrome/renderer/frame_snif...
File chrome/renderer/frame_sniffer.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/10879105/diff/5001/chrome/renderer/frame_snif...
chrome/renderer/frame_sniffer.h:16: FrameSniffer(content::RenderView*
render_view, const string16 &frame_name);
nit: maybe change this as well to make it clear what the argument is?

[nasko, 2012-08-29 15:38:59]

Fixed nit.

https://codereview.chromium.org/10879105/diff/5001/chrome/renderer/frame_snif...
File chrome/renderer/frame_sniffer.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/10879105/diff/5001/chrome/renderer/frame_snif...
chrome/renderer/frame_sniffer.h:16: FrameSniffer(content::RenderView*
render_view, const string16 &frame_name);
On 2012/08/29 15:11:26, John Abd-El-Malek wrote:
> nit: maybe change this as well to make it clear what the argument is?

Done.

[tony, 2012-08-29 16:38:02]

LGTM

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-08-29 16:41:08]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/nasko@chromium.org/10879105/9002

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-08-29 18:10:04]

Try job failure for 10879105-9002 (retry) on linux_rel for step
"interactive_ui_tests".
It's a second try, previously, step "interactive_ui_tests" failed.
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/buildstatus?builder=linux_rel&...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-08-29 20:07:11]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/nasko@chromium.org/10879105/9002

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-08-29 22:01:56]

Try job failure for 10879105-9002 (retry) on linux_rel for step
"interactive_ui_tests".
It's a second try, previously, step "interactive_ui_tests" failed.
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/buildstatus?builder=linux_rel&...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-08-30 15:46:51]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/nasko@chromium.org/10879105/9002

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-08-30 20:14:00]

Change committed as 154246