Move hash_pair.h from cc/base into base/.

Move hash_pair.h from cc/base into base/.

BUG=

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=207475

[nasko, 2013-06-14 16:08:45]

Hey Dana,
I'm moving your hash_pair.h code into base, so I can use it in content. Can you
review this move?
Thanks,
Nasko

[danakj, 2013-06-14 16:48:17]

LGTM.

This needs to live in base in order for anyone else to use a pair as a key for a
hash map/set, since we can't define these functions twice in the code base.

[nasko, 2013-06-14 16:55:33]

Including brettw@ for base/ OWNERS review.

[brettw, 2013-06-14 22:18:14]

Can you put this in the base/containers subdirectory? We're trying to move stuff
out of the root base one. Although this isn't strictly a container, it seems
related enough to pair to not be "too weird" in the containers directory (and
it's next to hash_tables).

LGTM with that.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-06-17 15:39:58]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/nasko@chromium.org/17094004/8001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-06-17 18:31:19]

Retried try job too often on win_rel for step(s) browser_tests
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/buildstatus?builder=win_rel&nu...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-06-17 18:40:01]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/nasko@chromium.org/17094004/8001

[nasko, 2013-06-17 18:45:14]

I was told jar@ initially had arguments against adding this to base/. 

jar@ have another use for using a pair of integers as lookup in a hash table -
https://codereview.chromium.org/16431010/.

The review for it is gated on this functionality moving to base. I'd like to
resolve this - either move it there and use it or use a different hashing
function. I'd appreciate your comments.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-06-17 20:24:12]

List of reviewers changed. jar@chromium.org did a drive-by without LGTM'ing!

[awong, 2013-06-17 20:26:35]

On 2013/06/17 20:24:12, I haz the power (commit-bot) wrote:
> List of reviewers changed. mailto:jar@chromium.org did a drive-by without
LGTM'ing!

Also, I strongly believe this should either go directly in
base/containers/hash_tables.h, but included by hash_tables.h. Since hash_pair is
working purely on primitive + stl types, it sounds like we'd be opening
ourselves up to ODR violations otherwise.

-Albert

[nasko, 2013-06-19 21:37:04]

ping jar@

ajwong@ - I'm fine with folding it into hash_table.h, but I will wait to hear
jar@'s response first.

[jar (doing other things), 2013-06-19 21:42:25]

On 2013/06/19 21:37:04, nasko wrote:
> ping jar@
> 
> ajwong@ - I'm fine with folding it into hash_table.h, but I will wait to hear
> jar@'s response first.

Inclusion as suggested by ajwong@ SGTM.

[nasko, 2013-06-19 23:33:58]

I've moved the hash_pair.h code into hash_tables.h.

ajwong@, please review as you raised the point.

[awong, 2013-06-19 23:38:42]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/17094004/diff/40001/base/containers/ha...
File base/containers/hash_tables.h (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/17094004/diff/40001/base/containers/ha...
base/containers/hash_tables.h:155: // Theorem 4.3.3 of the thesis "Über die
Komplexität der Multiplikation in
you might want to cite danakj@ in the comment...unless of course you like having
people ask you about the reference to a german paper. :)

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/17094004/diff/40001/base/containers/ha...
base/containers/hash_tables.h:159: 
spurious newline.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/17094004/diff/40001/base/containers/ha...
base/containers/hash_tables.h:197: 
spurious newline.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/17094004/diff/40001/base/containers/ha...
base/containers/hash_tables.h:264: 
spurious newline.

[nasko, 2013-06-19 23:45:28]

Cleaned up.

https://codereview.chromium.org/17094004/diff/40001/base/containers/hash_tabl...
File base/containers/hash_tables.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/17094004/diff/40001/base/containers/hash_tabl...
base/containers/hash_tables.h:155: // Theorem 4.3.3 of the thesis "Über die
Komplexität der Multiplikation in
On 2013/06/19 23:38:43, awong wrote:
> you might want to cite danakj@ in the comment...unless of course you like
having
> people ask you about the reference to a german paper. :)

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/17094004/diff/40001/base/containers/hash_tabl...
base/containers/hash_tables.h:159: 
On 2013/06/19 23:38:43, awong wrote:
> spurious newline.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/17094004/diff/40001/base/containers/hash_tabl...
base/containers/hash_tables.h:197: 
On 2013/06/19 23:38:43, awong wrote:
> spurious newline.

As discussed, this was meant for line 203. Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/17094004/diff/40001/base/containers/hash_tabl...
base/containers/hash_tables.h:264: 
On 2013/06/19 23:38:43, awong wrote:
> spurious newline.

Done.

[awong, 2013-06-19 23:49:34]

LGTM

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-06-20 04:50:24]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/nasko@chromium.org/17094004/46001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-06-20 17:26:50]

Change committed as 207475