Android: generates JNI bindings for constructors in system classes.

Android: generates JNI bindings for constructors in system classes.

This allows to simplify some places such as surface_texture_bridge.

BUG=
TEST=


Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=158249

[bulach, 2012-09-20 10:55:59]

jam: need OWNERS review for content/content.gyp

yfriedman / qinmin / sievers: since we have coverage for doing it here first,
it's the same patch as downstream with the latest yaron's comments.

thanks!

[jam, 2012-09-20 16:04:15]

lgtm

http://codereview.chromium.org/10968009/diff/2001/content/common/android/surf...
File content/common/android/surface_texture_bridge.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/10968009/diff/2001/content/common/android/surf...
content/common/android/surface_texture_bridge.cc:38:
JNI_SurfaceTexture::Java_SurfaceTexture_Constructor(env,
nit: the indentation of the parameters here (and the rest of the file) doesn't
match the style guide. the start of parameters on each line needs to be the same
column

[bulach, 2012-09-20 16:31:18]

thanks jam! comments inline, another quick look please?

http://codereview.chromium.org/10968009/diff/2001/content/common/android/surf...
File content/common/android/surface_texture_bridge.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/10968009/diff/2001/content/common/android/surf...
content/common/android/surface_texture_bridge.cc:38:
JNI_SurfaceTexture::Java_SurfaceTexture_Constructor(env,
On 2012/09/20 16:04:15, John Abd-El-Malek wrote:
> nit: the indentation of the parameters here (and the rest of the file) doesn't
> match the style guide. the start of parameters on each line needs to be the
same
> column

thanks jam! I'm not sure I fully understood, but... I moved the first param to
the second line, indented+4. would you mind verifying that's what you meant
please? :)

fwiw, the styleguide says this is ok (and I got asked on other reviews), hence
my confusion:

AndAnotherLongFunctionCall(first_lengthy_argument,
    second_argument, yet_another);


apologies if I completely misunderstood you :)

[jam, 2012-09-20 16:53:20]

lgtm

http://codereview.chromium.org/10968009/diff/2001/content/common/android/surf...
File content/common/android/surface_texture_bridge.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/10968009/diff/2001/content/common/android/surf...
content/common/android/surface_texture_bridge.cc:38:
JNI_SurfaceTexture::Java_SurfaceTexture_Constructor(env,
On 2012/09/20 16:31:18, bulach wrote:
> On 2012/09/20 16:04:15, John Abd-El-Malek wrote:
> > nit: the indentation of the parameters here (and the rest of the file)
doesn't
> > match the style guide. the start of parameters on each line needs to be the
> same
> > column
> 
> thanks jam! I'm not sure I fully understood, but... I moved the first param to
> the second line, indented+4. would you mind verifying that's what you meant
> please? :)
> 
> fwiw, the styleguide says this is ok (and I got asked on other reviews), hence
> my confusion:
> 
> AndAnotherLongFunctionCall(first_lengthy_argument,
>     second_argument, yet_another);
> 
> 
> apologies if I completely misunderstood you :)

doh. i just saw that. that's against the google style guide, and there's no good
reason we should go against it. i've removed this line.

[bulach, 2012-09-20 17:10:38]

brilliant! :) thanks for the clarification!

[Yaron, 2012-09-20 18:51:18]

On 2012/09/20 17:10:38, bulach wrote:
> brilliant! :) thanks for the clarification!

lgtm

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-09-24 08:32:20]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/bulach@chromium.org/10968009/5001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-09-24 11:01:42]

Change committed as 158249