http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1470803/diff/19/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/AccessModifiers.java File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/AccessModifiers.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1470803/diff/19/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/AccessModifiers.java#newcode21 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/AccessModifiers.java:21: public enum AccessModifiers { On 2011/07/06 17:00:29, zundel wrote:
Note, using <value>.ordinal() means that any changing in order is
going to screw
up the serialized tree. I suggest we either do something to protect
against
that in JMethod, or add a dire warning here against reordring the
values (e.g.
sorting them alphabetcially)
Done. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1470803/diff/19/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/AccessModifiers.java#newcode21 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/AccessModifiers.java:21: public enum AccessModifiers { On 2011/07/06 17:31:33, jbrosenberg wrote:
I'll second Eric's concern here. But that not-withstanding, I'd
suggest the
name of this enum should be singular, e.g., "AccessModifier". Since
you can't
compose multiple modifiers in a single instance, it appears misleading
when you
declare it as a param to a method, e.g. myFunc(AccessModifiers
access).... Done. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1470803/diff/19/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JConstructor.java File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JConstructor.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1470803/diff/19/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JConstructor.java#newcode53 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JConstructor.java:53: // Access only matters for virtual methods, just use public. I wanted to leave open the possibility of extending it to track other methods eventually, which makes adding additional access modifiers kind of sour tasting. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1470803/diff/19/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/1470803/diff/19/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JMethod.java#newcode140 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JMethod.java:140: this.access = access.ordinal(); What I ended up doing is asserting explicit ordinal values in AccessModifier to guarantee stable values. See updated patch. Added additional API seemed more dangerous, as it would be very easy to mix up use of ordinal() and the new api accidentially. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1470803/diff/19/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/1470803/diff/19/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/GwtAstBuilder.java#newcode2824 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/GwtAstBuilder.java:2824: static AccessModifiers getAccessModifier(MethodBinding b) { On 2011/07/06 17:00:29, zundel wrote:
Make this method AccessModifiers.fromMethodBinding()?
Done. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1470803/diff/19/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/1470803/diff/19/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/UnifyAst.java#newcode728 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/UnifyAst.java:728: for (JMethod upref : collected.get(method.getSignature())) { On 2011/07/06 17:31:33, jbrosenberg wrote:
debug cruft?
Done. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1470803/ -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
