Clean up on byte_stream (mainly style and includes)

Clean up on byte_stream (mainly style and includes)

- Don't allocate ContentVector if input_contents_size_ is 0
- Remove unused weak_ptr.h and lock.h
- Add comments required by style guide
- Move includes not used in .h to .cc

BUG=

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=215958

[Randy Smith (Not in Mondays), 2013-08-02 18:43:04]

https://codereview.chromium.org/21839002/diff/1/content/browser/byte_stream.cc
File content/browser/byte_stream.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/21839002/diff/1/content/browser/byte_stream.c...
content/browser/byte_stream.cc:269: scoped_ptr<ContentVector> transfer_buffer;
I believe the answer is yes, but just confirming: Do we have a test for a null
data PostToPeer in the test set?

https://codereview.chromium.org/21839002/diff/1/content/browser/byte_stream.h
File content/browser/byte_stream.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/21839002/diff/1/content/browser/byte_stream.h...
content/browser/byte_stream.h:16: }  // namespace base
Can you give me a pointer to the section of the style guide that specifies this
behavior?  I agree that it's common practice (including in the style guide
examples) to include a "// namespace" at the end of the namespace, but I can't
find it specified, and in that context, putting a closing comment two lines
after the namespace opening seems like unnecessary distracting text--it's
obvious to anyone looking at this code what the closing brace refers to.  (I
don't feel strongly, but I do have an opinion, so I'd like to at least have a
specific style guide directive to weigh against that opinion.)

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2013-08-05 07:53:11]

https://codereview.chromium.org/21839002/diff/1/content/browser/byte_stream.cc
File content/browser/byte_stream.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/21839002/diff/1/content/browser/byte_stream.c...
content/browser/byte_stream.cc:269: scoped_ptr<ContentVector> transfer_buffer;
On 2013/08/02 18:43:05, rdsmith wrote:
> I believe the answer is yes, but just confirming: Do we have a test for a null
> data PostToPeer in the test set?

Added.

https://codereview.chromium.org/21839002/diff/1/content/browser/byte_stream.h
File content/browser/byte_stream.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/21839002/diff/1/content/browser/byte_stream.h...
content/browser/byte_stream.h:16: }  // namespace base
On 2013/08/02 18:43:05, rdsmith wrote:
> Can you give me a pointer to the section of the style guide that specifies
this
> behavior?  I agree that it's common practice (including in the style guide
> examples) to include a "// namespace" at the end of the namespace, but I can't
> find it specified, and in that context, putting a closing comment two lines

Yes, it's not explicitly stated but a common practice.

> after the namespace opening seems like unnecessary distracting text--it's
> obvious to anyone looking at this code what the closing brace refers to.  (I
> don't feel strongly, but I do have an opinion, so I'd like to at least have a
> specific style guide directive to weigh against that opinion.)

OK. It makes sense. Removed.

[Randy Smith (Not in Mondays), 2013-08-05 13:28:36]

LGTM>

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-08-06 03:47:17]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/tyoshino@chromium.org/21839002/7001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-08-06 04:01:07]

Retried try job too often on chromium_presubmit for step(s) presubmit
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/buildstatus?builder=chromium_p...

[tyoshino (SeeGerritForStatus), 2013-08-06 04:12:38]

avi,

Could you please do OWNER review? Like last CL, I've got LGTM from rdsmith who's
familiar with byte_stream*.

[Avi (use Gerrit), 2013-08-06 04:54:22]

Tests!

LGTM

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-08-06 04:59:43]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/tyoshino@chromium.org/21839002/7001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-08-06 20:18:46]

Change committed as 215958