Make EventFilteringInfo::IsEmpty() take has_instance_id_ into account.

Make EventFilteringInfo::IsEmpty() take has_instance_id_ into account.

We should not consider event filtering info to be empty if a filter
is for a <webview> guest, i.e. it has an instance id.
This probably was an oversight while adding has_instance_id_/instance_id_
to EventFilteringInfo.

BUG=None
Test=None

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=245486

[Fady Samuel, 2014-01-16 17:37:15]

lgtm

[lazyboy, 2014-01-16 17:40:40]

+kalman for OWNERS.

[not at google - send to devlin, 2014-01-16 23:58:58]

lgtm (ignore my comment obviously)

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/140633003/diff/1/extensions/common/eve...
File extensions/common/event_filtering_info.cc (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/140633003/diff/1/extensions/common/eve...
extensions/common/event_filtering_info.cc:13: : has_url_(false),
having both a url_ and a has_url_ seems redundant. why aren't we just checking
url_.IsValid() (or is that url_.valid()?) I wonder.

[lazyboy, 2014-01-17 01:08:47]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/140633003/diff/1/extensions/common/eve...
File extensions/common/event_filtering_info.cc (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/140633003/diff/1/extensions/common/eve...
extensions/common/event_filtering_info.cc:13: : has_url_(false),
On 2014/01/16 23:58:59, kalman wrote:
> having both a url_ and a has_url_ seems redundant. why aren't we just checking
> url_.IsValid() (or is that url_.valid()?) I wonder.

Seems this was checked in from the initial revision.
The only difference I can imagine would be when SetURL(GURL()) is called,
has_url_ would be true. But I don't know if the code calling this function is
counting on this behavior.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-01-17 06:43:45]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/lazyboy@chromium.org/140633003/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-01-17 10:26:05]

Change committed as 245486