On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Scott Blum <[email protected]> wrote: > Gotcha. Okay that makes sense. At the same time, I can't help but wonder > if the idea of retargeting to new params/locals couldn't somehow be baked > into the Cloners to force the issue.
Conceivably a statement could be cloned and then put back in the same method. So, a clone of a parameter ref makes sense on its own. It depends on what you do with it, or with what other transformations you do afterwards. A check at the place the item is added into a tree would certainly make sense, but it would probably slow down the compiles. As one possibility, Context.replaceMe could, if some paranoid mode flag is turned on, verify that the inserted tree makes sense. Lex --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
