Chromium Code Reviews| Index: chrome/browser/protector/base_setting_change.cc |
| diff --git a/chrome/browser/protector/base_setting_change.cc b/chrome/browser/protector/base_setting_change.cc |
| index 805d48b96f17813477f95bb27031e170361e0c62..04aae0abe7a518930adad3ca5ce489149b905785 100644 |
| --- a/chrome/browser/protector/base_setting_change.cc |
| +++ b/chrome/browser/protector/base_setting_change.cc |
| @@ -3,11 +3,15 @@ |
| // found in the LICENSE file. |
| #include "chrome/browser/protector/base_setting_change.h" |
| +#include "chrome/browser/protector/composite_settings_change.h" |
| #include "base/logging.h" |
| namespace protector { |
| +// static |
| +const size_t BaseSettingChange::kDefaultNamePriority = 0U; |
| + |
| BaseSettingChange::BaseSettingChange() |
| : profile_(NULL) { |
| } |
| @@ -15,6 +19,20 @@ BaseSettingChange::BaseSettingChange() |
| BaseSettingChange::~BaseSettingChange() { |
| } |
| +CompositeSettingsChange* BaseSettingChange::MergeWith( |
| + BaseSettingChange* other) { |
| + CompositeSettingsChange* composite_change = new CompositeSettingsChange; |
|
whywhat
2012/04/06 16:28:32
nit: I think we should use () always for construct
Ivan Korotkov
2012/04/09 14:46:47
Done.
|
| + CHECK(composite_change->Init(profile_)); |
| + composite_change->MergeWith(this); |
| + composite_change->MergeWith(other); |
| + return composite_change; |
| +} |
| + |
| +bool BaseSettingChange::Contains(const BaseSettingChange* other) const { |
| + // BaseSettingChange can only contain itself. |
| + return this == other; |
| +} |
| + |
| bool BaseSettingChange::Init(Profile* profile) { |
| DCHECK(profile); |
| profile_ = profile; |
| @@ -30,4 +48,13 @@ void BaseSettingChange::Discard(Browser* browser) { |
| void BaseSettingChange::Timeout() { |
| } |
| +BaseSettingChange::DisplayName BaseSettingChange::GetApplyDisplayName() const { |
| + return DisplayName(kDefaultNamePriority, string16()); |
| +} |
| + |
| +std::string BaseSettingChange::GetApplyKeyword() const { |
| + // By default change should not be collapsed with others. |
| + return std::string(); |
|
whywhat
2012/04/06 16:28:32
Maybe this property should be returned by clearer
Ivan Korotkov
2012/04/09 14:46:47
In most cases, the IsCollapsible will have the sam
whywhat
2012/04/10 09:55:44
So? I see nothing wrong with that :)
Ivan Korotkov
2012/04/10 11:19:49
Er, well, code duplication is bad isn't it? :)
If
whywhat
2012/04/10 11:22:08
There would be none if IsCollapsible() would be im
Ivan Korotkov
2012/04/10 11:33:17
Ok, you've convinced me :)
|
| +} |
| + |
| } // namespace protector |