Prepare to upgrade ICU to 58 part 2

Prepare to upgrade ICU to 58 part 2

U_LB_COUNT is assumed to be 40 in Blink line breaking code, but it's
43 in ICU 58/Unicode 9.

Three new classes (Emoji Base, Emoji Modifier, and ZWJ) should behave
identically whether or not 'word-break: break-all' is in effect.

BUG=637001
TEST=TextBreakIterator.cpp is compiled without an error with ICU 58.
R=kojii@chromium.org
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=master.tryserver.blink:linux_precise_blink_rel

Committed: https://crrev.com/e60b571faa3f14dd9119a6792dccf12f8bf80192
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#426860}

[jungshik at Google, 2016-10-21 09:11:16]

jshin@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ drott@chromium.org

[jungshik at Google, 2016-10-21 09:11:17]

drott@chromium.org and kojii@, can you take a look?

[kojii, 2016-10-21 14:16:57]

non-owner lgtm, the table provides *additional* break opportunities when
break-all. Emoji should have break opportunities (correct?) so false looks
reasonable to me.

drott@, can you rs, or shall we ask eae@ to have a look? I think either leviw or
eae reviewed this code.

[drott, 2016-10-21 15:01:23]

jshin@, you're saying that these classes do not introduce any extra line
breaking opportunities, and emoji line breaking would "fallback to normal line
breaking"?

"Three new classes (Emoji Base, Emoji Modifier,
and ZWJ) need not be subject to the rules for 'word-break: break-all'."

In that case LGTM.

[jungshik at Google, 2016-10-21 17:21:30]

Thanks, drott@ and kojii@, for reviewing/approval. 

On 2016/10/21 15:01:23, drott wrote:
> jshin@, you're saying that these classes do not introduce any extra line
> breaking opportunities, and emoji line breaking would "fallback to normal line
> breaking"?

Yes.  I don't expect EB, EM and ZWJ to behave differently under 'word-break:
break-all'.

'EB' should behave like ID except when it's followed by EM and that's exactly
what UAX 14 says (see below an excerpt from UAX 14). 
Because it's like ID and ID behaves the same way whether it's under
'wb-break-all' or not, we don't need a separate entry for EB. Below is an ID
line
for wb:break-all array. 

{ B(0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0), B(0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0), B(0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
0), B(0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0), B(0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0) }, // ID

'EM' and 'ZWJ' should change its behavior under 'w-b: break-all', either because
they'd appear in the middle of a grapheme cluster and 
a grapheme cluster should never be broken into two lines in any circumstance. 

-----------------
EB: Emoji Base (B/A)

This class includes characters whose appearance can be modified by a subsequent
emoji modifier in an emoji modifier sequence. This class directly corresponds to
the Emoji_Modifier_Base property as defined in Section 1.4.4 Emoji Modifiers of
[UTR51].


Breaks within emoji modifier sequences are prevented by rule LB30b. In other
contexts, characters of class EB behave similarly to ideographs of class ID,
with break opportunities before and after.

EM: Emoji Modifier (A)

This class includes characters that can be used to modify the appearance of a
preceding emoji in an emoji modifier sequence. This class directly corresponds
to the Emoji_Modifier property as defined in Section 1.4.4 Emoji Modifiers of
[UTR51].

Breaks within emoji modifier sequences are prevented by rule LB30b.

-------------------------

 
> "Three new classes (Emoji Base, Emoji Modifier,
> and ZWJ) need not be subject to the rules for 'word-break: break-all'."

 
> In that case LGTM.

[jungshik at Google, 2016-10-21 17:22:28]

Description was changed from

==========
Prepare to upgrade ICU to 58 part 2

U_LB_COUNT is assumed to be 40 in Blink line breaking code, but it's
43 in ICU 58/Unicode 9.

Three new classes (Emoji Base, Emoji Modifier,
and ZWJ) need not be subject to the rules for 'word-break: break-all'.

BUG=637001
TEST=TextBreakIterator.cpp is compiled without an error with ICU 58.
R=kojii@chromium.org
==========

to

==========
Prepare to upgrade ICU to 58 part 2

U_LB_COUNT is assumed to be 40 in Blink line breaking code, but it's
43 in ICU 58/Unicode 9.

Three new classes (Emoji Base, Emoji Modifier,
and ZWJ) should behave identically whether or not 'word-break: break-all' is in
effect. 

BUG=637001
TEST=TextBreakIterator.cpp is compiled without an error with ICU 58.
R=kojii@chromium.org
==========

[jungshik at Google, 2016-10-21 17:23:12]

Description was changed from

==========
Prepare to upgrade ICU to 58 part 2

U_LB_COUNT is assumed to be 40 in Blink line breaking code, but it's
43 in ICU 58/Unicode 9.

Three new classes (Emoji Base, Emoji Modifier,
and ZWJ) should behave identically whether or not 'word-break: break-all' is in
effect. 

BUG=637001
TEST=TextBreakIterator.cpp is compiled without an error with ICU 58.
R=kojii@chromium.org
==========

to

==========
Prepare to upgrade ICU to 58 part 2

U_LB_COUNT is assumed to be 40 in Blink line breaking code, but it's
43 in ICU 58/Unicode 9.

Three new classes (Emoji Base, Emoji Modifier, and ZWJ) should behave
identically whether or not 'word-break: break-all' is in effect.

BUG=637001
TEST=TextBreakIterator.cpp is compiled without an error with ICU 58.
R=kojii@chromium.org
==========

[jungshik at Google, 2016-10-21 17:23:17]

The CQ bit was checked by jshin@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-10-21 17:23:38]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[jungshik at Google, 2016-10-21 17:47:03]

The CQ bit was unchecked by jshin@chromium.org

[jungshik at Google, 2016-10-21 17:47:59]

Description was changed from

==========
Prepare to upgrade ICU to 58 part 2

U_LB_COUNT is assumed to be 40 in Blink line breaking code, but it's
43 in ICU 58/Unicode 9.

Three new classes (Emoji Base, Emoji Modifier, and ZWJ) should behave
identically whether or not 'word-break: break-all' is in effect.

BUG=637001
TEST=TextBreakIterator.cpp is compiled without an error with ICU 58.
R=kojii@chromium.org
==========

to

==========
Prepare to upgrade ICU to 58 part 2

U_LB_COUNT is assumed to be 40 in Blink line breaking code, but it's
43 in ICU 58/Unicode 9.

Three new classes (Emoji Base, Emoji Modifier, and ZWJ) should behave
identically whether or not 'word-break: break-all' is in effect.

BUG=637001
TEST=TextBreakIterator.cpp is compiled without an error with ICU 58.
R=kojii@chromium.org
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=master.tryserver.blink:linux_precise_blink_rel
==========

[jungshik at Google, 2016-10-21 17:48:07]

The CQ bit was checked by jshin@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-10-21 17:48:42]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-10-21 19:20:30]

Committed patchset #1 (id:1)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-10-21 19:44:52]

Description was changed from

==========
Prepare to upgrade ICU to 58 part 2

U_LB_COUNT is assumed to be 40 in Blink line breaking code, but it's
43 in ICU 58/Unicode 9.

Three new classes (Emoji Base, Emoji Modifier, and ZWJ) should behave
identically whether or not 'word-break: break-all' is in effect.

BUG=637001
TEST=TextBreakIterator.cpp is compiled without an error with ICU 58.
R=kojii@chromium.org
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=master.tryserver.blink:linux_precise_blink_rel
==========

to

==========
Prepare to upgrade ICU to 58 part 2

U_LB_COUNT is assumed to be 40 in Blink line breaking code, but it's
43 in ICU 58/Unicode 9.

Three new classes (Emoji Base, Emoji Modifier, and ZWJ) should behave
identically whether or not 'word-break: break-all' is in effect.

BUG=637001
TEST=TextBreakIterator.cpp is compiled without an error with ICU 58.
R=kojii@chromium.org
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=master.tryserver.blink:linux_precise_blink_rel

Committed: https://crrev.com/e60b571faa3f14dd9119a6792dccf12f8bf80192
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#426860}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-10-21 19:44:53]

Patchset 1 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/e60b571faa3f14dd9119a6792dccf12f8bf80192
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#426860}