Issue #41 - Bring method of determining IE version up to date

src/engine/Main.cpp

 #include <AdblockPlus.h>
 #include <functional>
 #include <vector>
 #include <thread>
 #include <Windows.h>
 
 #include "../shared/AutoHandle.h"
 #include "../shared/Communication.h"
 #include "../shared/Dictionary.h"
 #include "../shared/Utils.h"
@@ skipping 75 matching lines @@
     request >> procedure;
     switch (procedure)
     {
       case Communication::PROC_MATCHES:
       {
         std::string url;
         std::string type;
         std::string documentUrl;
         request >> url >> type >> documentUrl;
         referrerMapping.Add(url, documentUrl); 
-        AdblockPlus::FilterPtr filter = filterEngine->Matches(url, type, referrerMapping.BuildReferrerChain(url));
+        AdblockPlus::FilterPtr filter = filterEngine->Matches(url, type, referrerMapping.BuildReferrerChain(documentUrl));
         response << (filter && filter->GetType() != AdblockPlus::Filter::TYPE_EXCEPTION);
         break;
       }
       case Communication::PROC_GET_ELEMHIDE_SELECTORS:
       {
         std::string domain;
         request >> domain;
         WriteStrings(response, filterEngine->GetElementHidingSelectors(domain));
         break;
       }
@@ skipping 83 matching lines @@
         break;
       }
       case Communication::PROC_IS_WHITELISTED_URL:
       {
         std::string url;
         request >> url;
         AdblockPlus::FilterPtr match = filterEngine->Matches(url, "DOCUMENT", url);
         response << (match && match->GetType() == AdblockPlus::Filter::TYPE_EXCEPTION);
         break;
       }
+      case Communication::PROC_IS_ELEMHIDE_WHITELISTED_ON_URL:
+      {
+        std::string url;
+        request >> url;
+        AdblockPlus::FilterPtr match = filterEngine->Matches(url, "ELEMHIDE", url);
+        response << (match && match->GetType() == AdblockPlus::Filter::TYPE_EXCEPTION);
+        break;
+      }
       case Communication::PROC_ADD_FILTER:
       {
         std::string text;
         request >> text;
 
         filterEngine->GetFilter(text)->AddToList();
         break;
       }
       case Communication::PROC_REMOVE_FILTER:
       {
@@ skipping 88 matching lines @@
         CriticalSection::Lock lock(firstRunLock);
         if (!firstRunActionExecuted && filterEngine->IsFirstRun())
         {
           response << true;
           firstRunActionExecuted = true;
         }
         else
         {
           response << false;
         }
+        break;
+      }
+      case Communication::PROC_COMPARE_VERSIONS:
+      {
+        std::string v1, v2;
+        request >> v1 >> v2;
+
+        response << filterEngine->CompareVersions(v1, v2);
         break;
       }
       case Communication::PROC_GET_DOCUMENTATION_LINK:
       {
         response << ToUtf16String(filterEngine->GetPref("documentation_link")->AsString());
         break;
       }
       case Communication::PROC_TOGGLE_PLUGIN_ENABLED:
       {
         filterEngine->SetPref("enabled", filterEngine->GetJsEngine()->NewValue(!filterEngine->GetPref("enabled")->AsBool()));
@@ skipping 82 matching lines @@
 std::auto_ptr<AdblockPlus::FilterEngine> CreateFilterEngine(const std::wstring& locale)
 {
   AdblockPlus::AppInfo appInfo;
   appInfo.version = ToUtf8String(IEPLUGIN_VERSION);
   appInfo.name = "adblockplusie";
 #ifdef _WIN64
   appInfo.application = "msie64";
 #else
   appInfo.application = "msie32";
 #endif
-  appInfo.applicationVersion = ToUtf8String(AdblockPlus::IE::installed_version_string());

[sergei, 2014/07/28 11:46:27]

Why do we need it here? The engine should not know about IE anything. If it's
useful for the log, then pass User-Agent in the first message (pipe) while
establishing the connection with the engine.
Even without digging deeper I'm pretty sure `appInfo.applicationVersion` denotes
the version of the current application, thus engine.

[sergei, 2014/07/29 14:45:56]

Still disagree here.
Why do we need the current solution, if it's not good and not what we really
need? It will raise again, let's do it correctly at the first round.
Let's move the discussion to issues.adblockplus.org, I've updated the ticket.

[Eric, 2014/07/29 15:17:22]

OK, but this is a code review, not an architecture review.

As I see it, Wladimir opened ticket #41, and it's to support the JS code in
libadblockplus, so it's beyond my scope to worry about the details of why he
wants it. Personally, even if it's only for error logging it's a good enough
reason for me.

Populating a single string member clearly does not introduce a new defect. The
bulk of the code here is also required for #404, so knocking of an
otherwise-harmless change at the same time is just not a problem.

[sergei, 2014/07/30 13:49:21]

I'm moving the discussion to intraforum.
https://intraforum.adblockplus.org/t/what-is-the-relation-between-code-review...
want to persist in thinking that this is the right place to talk about this
architectural decision, you are welcome to.
Until that ticket changes, I'll consider it valid.

See my comment above, "Let's move the discussion to issues.adblockplus.org, I've
updated the ticket."

+  appInfo.applicationVersion = ToUtf8String(AdblockPlus::IE::InstalledVersionString());
   appInfo.locale = ToUtf8String(locale);
 #ifdef ADBLOCK_PLUS_TEST_MODE
   appInfo.developmentBuild = true;
 #else
   appInfo.developmentBuild = false;
 #endif
 
   AdblockPlus::JsEnginePtr jsEngine = AdblockPlus::JsEngine::New(appInfo);
   jsEngine->SetEventCallback("updateAvailable", &OnUpdateAvailable);
 
@@ skipping 48 matching lines @@
     }
     catch (const std::runtime_error& e)
     {
       DebugException(e);
       return 1;
     }
   }
 
   return 0;
 }