Issue 5141 - [emscripten] Convert filter matcher to C++

compiled/matcher/Matcher.h

+/*
+ * This file is part of Adblock Plus <https://adblockplus.org/>,
+ * Copyright (C) 2006-present eyeo GmbH
+ *
+ * Adblock Plus is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
+ * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 3 as
+ * published by the Free Software Foundation.
+ *
+ * Adblock Plus is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
+ * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+ * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
+ * GNU General Public License for more details.
+ *
+ * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
+ * along with Adblock Plus.  If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
+ */
+
+#pragma once
+
+#include <vector>
+
+#include "../intrusive_ptr.h"
+#include "../IntMap.h"
+#include "../String.h"
+#include "../filter/Filter.h"
+#include "../filter/RegExpFilter.h"
+
+class Matcher : public ref_counted
+{
+private:
+  Uint32Map<RegExpFilterPtr> mFilters;
+  std::vector<RegExpFilterPtr> mUnoptimizedFilters;

[sergei, 2017/10/18 10:58:43]

IMO, prefix Non would be better in comparison with Un because there is just an
absence of an optimization.

+
+public:
+  static Matcher* BINDINGS_EXPORTED Create();
+
+  void BINDINGS_EXPORTED Add(Filter& filter);

[sergei, 2017/10/18 10:58:43]

Since Matcher works only with RegExpFilter-based filters should it accept here
RegExpFilter& and not Filter&?
I wonder whether moving that check out the method can even result in the
optimization, because anyway we sort filters out Matcher, ElemHide and
ElemHideEmulation.

+  void BINDINGS_EXPORTED Remove(const Filter& filter);
+  RegExpFilter* BINDINGS_EXPORTED MatchesAny(const String& location,
+      int typeMask, DependentString& docDomain, bool thirdParty,

[sergei, 2017/10/18 10:58:43]

Just for reference, I see how docDomain is used internally and understand that
it's an optimization but it's still looks questionable to have it not as `const
String&`.

+      const String& siteKey, bool specificOnly);

[Wladimir Palant, 2017/10/17 12:51:22]

Would be nice if this method could be const, it cannot return a non-const
pointer then however. And returning a const pointer would be wrong, the calling
JS code will likely modify it.

[sergei, 2017/10/18 10:58:43]

Yeah, since ref_counted is non-const it cannot be a const method.

BTW, I would propose to think about properties behind SetHitCount and SetLastHit
because IMO they should not be members of the filter object because they carry
information how a filter object is used and not about the filter itself, e.g. we
are not adding matcherHash property or subscriptions property to a filter
object.

+};