Settings: Clean up browser_options page according to style guide.

Settings: Clean up browser_options page according to style guide.

BUG=none
TEST=none
R=csilv

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=120679

[csilv, 2012-02-07 00:56:57]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/9317114/diff/1/chrome/browser/resource...
File chrome/browser/resources/options2/browser_options.css (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/9317114/diff/1/chrome/browser/resource...
chrome/browser/resources/options2/browser_options.css:36:
#defaultSearchManageEnginesButton {
default-search-manage-engines-button...?

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/9317114/diff/1/chrome/browser/resource...
File chrome/browser/resources/options2/browser_options.js (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/9317114/diff/1/chrome/browser/resource...
chrome/browser/resources/options2/browser_options.js:8: var RepeatingButton =
cr.ui.RepeatingButton;
it's const better for these?

[csilv, 2012-02-07 00:58:05]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/9317114/diff/1/chrome/browser/resource...
File chrome/browser/resources/options2/browser_options.js (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/9317114/diff/1/chrome/browser/resource...
chrome/browser/resources/options2/browser_options.js:8: var RepeatingButton =
cr.ui.RepeatingButton;
On 2012/02/07 00:56:57, csilv wrote:
> it's const better for these?

of course, i meant to say "isn't const better for these?"

[James Hawkins, 2012-02-07 01:27:59]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/9317114/diff/1/chrome/browser/resource...
File chrome/browser/resources/options2/browser_options.css (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/9317114/diff/1/chrome/browser/resource...
chrome/browser/resources/options2/browser_options.css:36:
#defaultSearchManageEnginesButton {
On 2012/02/07 00:56:57, csilv wrote:
> default-search-manage-engines-button...?

Done.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/9317114/diff/1/chrome/browser/resource...
File chrome/browser/resources/options2/browser_options.js (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/9317114/diff/1/chrome/browser/resource...
chrome/browser/resources/options2/browser_options.js:8: var RepeatingButton =
cr.ui.RepeatingButton;
On 2012/02/07 00:56:57, csilv wrote:
> it's const better for these?

No, const is not valid JS and V8 is slower when const is used.

[csilv, 2012-02-07 01:28:34]

lgtm

[Dan Beam, 2012-02-07 09:33:53]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/9317114/diff/1/chrome/browser/resource...
File chrome/browser/resources/options2/browser_options.js (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/9317114/diff/1/chrome/browser/resource...
chrome/browser/resources/options2/browser_options.js:8: var RepeatingButton =
cr.ui.RepeatingButton;
On 2012/02/07 01:28:00, James Hawkins wrote:
> On 2012/02/07 00:56:57, csilv wrote:
> > it's const better for these?
> 
> No, const is not valid JS and V8 is slower when const is used.

We're not using ES5-strict any where options2, so how would we know it's valid,
:P?  Just kidding, but James is right that const is slower, :( (just learned
this today), but it's on the way to getting specified (see: 12.2.2 of ECMAScript
6, http://bit.ly/ztz5HZ), :).

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/9317114/diff/5002/chrome/browser/resou...
File chrome/browser/resources/options2/browser_options.css (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/9317114/diff/5002/chrome/browser/resou...
chrome/browser/resources/options2/browser_options.css:3: * found in the LICENSE
file.
Why did you do this? ^

[James Hawkins, 2012-02-09 04:36:31]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/9317114/diff/5002/chrome/browser/resou...
File chrome/browser/resources/options2/browser_options.css (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/9317114/diff/5002/chrome/browser/resou...
chrome/browser/resources/options2/browser_options.css:3: * found in the LICENSE
file.
On 2012/02/07 09:33:53, Dan Beam wrote:
> Why did you do this? ^

Matches style we use everywhere in Chrome.  You should too.