Re-submit of AppLink implementation.

Re-submit of AppLink implementation.

The only difference is removed assert from AppLinkHandler getInstance()
method because it gets created on Test thread within tests.

BUG=609556
TBR=asvitkine@chromium.org

Committed: https://crrev.com/afdc2d9bbd7f7693542a6a94e4efc895fa40fe6c
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#392399}

[Maria, 2016-05-09 16:55:04]

mariakhomenko@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ dfalcantara@chromium.org, yfriedman@chromium.org

[gone, 2016-05-09 16:57:19]

Is that something that could have been handled with a
ThreadUtils.runOnUiThreadBlocking() call?

[chromium-reviews, 2016-05-09 17:21:31]

Not easily. I could probably get around it by mocking out the method that
references AppLinkHandler in the test, but since I am going to need to add
tests anyways, I think it would be easier to not have this assert.

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 9:57 AM <dfalcantara@chromium.org> wrote:

> Is that something that could have been handled with a
> ThreadUtils.runOnUiThreadBlocking() call?
>
> https://codereview.chromium.org/1956403002/
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Chromium-reviews" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to chromium-reviews+unsubscribe@chromium.org.

[gone, 2016-05-09 17:24:50]

lgtm

[gone, 2016-05-09 17:25:38]

Maybe you could force the function to be synchronized, or add a synchronized
block?

[chromium-reviews, 2016-05-09 17:32:46]

I could... I hope the overhead of grabbing a lock will be minimal since
it's never going to be locked.

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 10:25 AM <dfalcantara@chromium.org> wrote:

> Maybe you could force the function to be synchronized, or add a
> synchronized
> block?
>
> https://codereview.chromium.org/1956403002/
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Chromium-reviews" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to chromium-reviews+unsubscribe@chromium.org.

[gone, 2016-05-09 17:34:09]

I think it'd be worth it for correctness sake, but your call.

[Maria, 2016-05-09 18:32:49]

The CQ bit was checked by mariakhomenko@chromium.org

[Maria, 2016-05-09 18:32:50]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
dfalcantara@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1956403002/#ps20001
(title: "Lock it and throw away the key")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-09 18:33:20]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1956403002/20001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1956403002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-09 19:39:45]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-09 19:42:17]

Description was changed from

==========
Re-submit of AppLink implementation.

The only difference is removed assert from AppLinkHandler getInstance()
method because it gets created on Test thread within tests.

BUG=609556
TBR=asvitkine@chromium.org
==========

to

==========
Re-submit of AppLink implementation.

The only difference is removed assert from AppLinkHandler getInstance()
method because it gets created on Test thread within tests.

BUG=609556
TBR=asvitkine@chromium.org

Committed: https://crrev.com/afdc2d9bbd7f7693542a6a94e4efc895fa40fe6c
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#392399}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-09 19:42:18]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/afdc2d9bbd7f7693542a6a94e4efc895fa40fe6c
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#392399}