Create unit-test for exiting context menus via mouse button

Create unit-test for exiting context menus via mouse button

Added a unit-test to BookmarkBarViewTest. It opens a context
menu. The menu is dismissed by clicking the mouse outside of
it. The underlying view gets the mouse event after the
context menu has exited.

See also: 
https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/11761027

BUG=171891
TEST=manual, Run: 
out/Debug/interactive_ui_tests --gtest_filter='BookmarkBarViewTest20.*'

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=182137

[sschmitz, 2013-02-13 00:41:20]

This is identical to
https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/12087075
with one change:
The new unit-test is excluded on Windows. The earlier CL landed but the test
failed on Windows. The reason for the test was a change for X11.

[tfarina, 2013-02-13 00:44:26]

https://codereview.chromium.org/12217158/diff/1/chrome/browser/ui/views/bookm...
File chrome/browser/ui/views/bookmarks/bookmark_bar_view_test.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/12217158/diff/1/chrome/browser/ui/views/bookm...
chrome/browser/ui/views/bookmarks/bookmark_bar_view_test.cc:1588: #if
!defined(OS_WIN)
where is this test supposed to run? ChromeOS? if yes, is worth creating a new
file for it and possibly exclude it in the gyp file? This way we could avoid
messing with ifdefs here.

[tfarina, 2013-02-13 00:45:28]

also could you upload the revert first, and the in patch set 2 or 3, the fix? so
we can all see what really changed (I know it's just the ifdef condition)?

[sky, 2013-02-13 00:48:24]

LGTM

[sschmitz, 2013-02-13 00:52:35]

On 2013/02/13 00:45:28, tfarina wrote:
> also could you upload the revert first, and the in patch set 2 or 3, the fix?
so
> we can all see what really changed (I know it's just the ifdef condition)?

I'm not sure I understand your request.... The the earlier CL has already been
reverted.

[tfarina, 2013-02-13 00:54:05]

On 2013/02/13 00:52:35, sschmitz wrote:
> On 2013/02/13 00:45:28, tfarina wrote:
> > also could you upload the revert first, and the in patch set 2 or 3, the
fix?
> so
> > we can all see what really changed (I know it's just the ifdef condition)?
> 
> I'm not sure I understand your request.... The the earlier CL has already been
> reverted.

You are reverting the revert, my request was to upload that. Then you had to
change the ifdef condition. That was my another request, to upload your "fix" as
another patch set.

[sschmitz, 2013-02-13 00:58:45]

Good idea. Too bad, I did not think of that. Thanks.


On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 4:54 PM, <tfarina@chromium.org> wrote:

> On 2013/02/13 00:52:35, sschmitz wrote:
>
>> On 2013/02/13 00:45:28, tfarina wrote:
>> > also could you upload the revert first, and the in patch set 2 or 3, the
>>
> fix?
>
>> so
>> > we can all see what really changed (I know it's just the ifdef
>> condition)?
>>
>
>  I'm not sure I understand your request.... The the earlier CL has already
>> been
>> reverted.
>>
>
> You are reverting the revert, my request was to upload that. Then you had
> to
> change the ifdef condition. That was my another request, to upload your
> "fix" as
> another patch set.
>
>
https://codereview.chromium.**org/12217158/<https://codereview.chromium.org/1...
>

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-02-13 00:59:39]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/sschmitz@chromium.org/12217158/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-02-13 06:17:35]

Change committed as 182137