http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JClassType.java File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JClassType.java (left):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JClassType.java#oldcode90 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JClassType.java:90: * Right, since there's no avoiding having a setter for AST stitching. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JField.java File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JField.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JField.java#newcode178 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JField.java:178: boolean replaces(JField originalField) { On 2011/06/02 01:16:50, jbrosenberg wrote:
parens around && clause for better readability/formatting
Done. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JFieldRef.java File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JFieldRef.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JFieldRef.java#newcode103 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JFieldRef.java:103: public void resolve(JField newField) { Except that target would require a cast. :( http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JMethod.java File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JMethod.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JMethod.java#newcode316 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JMethod.java:316: assert returnType.replaces(this.returnType); On 2011/06/02 01:16:50, jbrosenberg wrote:
overrides is not a param here, is this still relevant?
Done. It was a leftover. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JMethod.java#newcode437 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JMethod.java:437: boolean replaces(JMethod originalMethod) { On 2011/06/02 01:16:50, jbrosenberg wrote:
parens around && clause for readability
Done. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JNameOf.java File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JNameOf.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JNameOf.java#newcode29 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JNameOf.java:29: if (newElement instanceof JType) { There's no point, it'll just throw a ClassCastException with more information if it's wrong. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JNameOf.java#newcode84 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JNameOf.java:84: /** On 2011/06/02 01:16:50, jbrosenberg wrote:
s/references/reference
Done. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JReferenceType.java File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JReferenceType.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JReferenceType.java#newcode76 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JReferenceType.java:76: public boolean replaces(JType originalType) { The ClassCastException is better http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JType.java File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JType.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JType.java#newcode87 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JType.java:87: boolean replaces(JType originalType) { On 2011/06/02 01:16:50, jbrosenberg wrote:
might read/format more clearly if you add parens around the && clause
Done. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/CodeSplitter.java File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/CodeSplitter.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/CodeSplitter.java#newcode488 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/CodeSplitter.java:488: /** It won't resolve since dev doesn't depend on user directly. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/GwtAstBuilder.java File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/GwtAstBuilder.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/GwtAstBuilder.java#newcode2760 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/GwtAstBuilder.java:2760: 'x' is for experiemental, it'll be gone shortly. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/UnifyAst.java File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/UnifyAst.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/UnifyAst.java#newcode100 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/UnifyAst.java:100: * Removed stale comment, otherwise cleaned up this whole section. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/UnifyAst.java#newcode104 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/UnifyAst.java:104: * On 2011/06/02 01:16:50, jbrosenberg wrote:
s/method/Method
Done. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/UnifyAst.java#newcode107 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/UnifyAst.java:107: * - New operations - type instantiability, constructor, overrides of live On 2011/06/02 01:16:50, jbrosenberg wrote:
is "- GWT.create()" meant to be a separate bullet point? Or is it
another in
the list, in which case s/-/,
Done. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/UnifyAst.java#newcode113 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/UnifyAst.java:113: * On 2011/06/02 01:16:50, jbrosenberg wrote:
Should this be part of GWT.runAsync() bullet point above?
Done. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/UnifyAst.java#newcode151 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/UnifyAst.java:151: Fixed the latter; but the comment applies to the whole section. You wouldn't need to resolve the leafType except that you need to see if it's an enumType. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/UnifyAst.java#newcode276 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/UnifyAst.java:276: public void endVisit(JNewInstance x, Context ctx) { It was to delegate to the JMethodCall logic, but after looking at that, it makes more sense to just pull the 1 line that actually matters in here. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/diff/2002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/UnifyAst.java#newcode369 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/UnifyAst.java:369: } On 2011/06/02 01:16:50, jbrosenberg wrote:
this is a repeated check for "(answerType == null)", did you mean
something else
here?
Done. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1451804/ -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
