Both LGTM. Good catch, thanks. :) On 11-Jun-09, at 1:15 PM, Scott Blum wrote:
> Matt, > > Could you review these two follow-on patches? The second depends on > the first. This is mostly non-functional cleanup to make things a > little simpler to read. The only substantive change is this: > > Presently, if we have a CanBooleanEval that fails to resolve, we do > nothing else. My second patch allows the failure case to fall > through and check for more simplifications. > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
