Second try for instantiation of objects.

Second try for instantiation of objects.

First try was here: http://codereview.chromium.org/8888010/

Committed: https://code.google.com/p/dart/source/detail?r=2313

[ngeoffray, 2011-12-09 14:27:43]

LGTM, with comments

http://codereview.chromium.org/8893001/diff/1001/frog/leg/elements/elements.dart
File frog/leg/elements/elements.dart (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/8893001/diff/1001/frog/leg/elements/elements.d...
frog/leg/elements/elements.dart:123: bool isStatic() {
As discussed, I *strongly* prefer something like isInstanceMember. We could even
drop the isStatic to a hasThis method.

http://codereview.chromium.org/8893001/diff/1001/frog/leg/elements/elements.d...
frog/leg/elements/elements.dart:160: Type get type() => constructor.type;
Not really fund of these getters, since we have the fields. I'd assign the
fields in the constructor. But your approach does have the advantage of
enforcing consistency between type, node, parameters and constructor.

Maybe ConsutrctorBodyElement should just extend Element? Then the getters would
work OK for me.

http://codereview.chromium.org/8893001/diff/1001/frog/leg/namer.dart
File frog/leg/namer.dart (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/8893001/diff/1001/frog/leg/namer.dart#newcode81
frog/leg/namer.dart:81: String instanceName(Element element) {
Why do you need instanceName and constructorBodyName? Why not just calling
getName and switching on the element?

[floitsch, 2011-12-09 15:24:57]

http://codereview.chromium.org/8893001/diff/1001/frog/leg/elements/elements.dart
File frog/leg/elements/elements.dart (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/8893001/diff/1001/frog/leg/elements/elements.d...
frog/leg/elements/elements.dart:123: bool isStatic() {
On 2011/12/09 14:27:44, ngeoffray wrote:
> As discussed, I *strongly* prefer something like isInstanceMember. We could
even
> drop the isStatic to a hasThis method.

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/8893001/diff/1001/frog/leg/elements/elements.d...
frog/leg/elements/elements.dart:160: Type get type() => constructor.type;
On 2011/12/09 14:27:44, ngeoffray wrote:
> Not really fund of these getters, since we have the fields. I'd assign the
> fields in the constructor. But your approach does have the advantage of
> enforcing consistency between type, node, parameters and constructor.
> 
> Maybe ConsutrctorBodyElement should just extend Element? Then the getters
would
> work OK for me.

Needs to be a FunctionElement. Copied over the fields.

http://codereview.chromium.org/8893001/diff/1001/frog/leg/namer.dart
File frog/leg/namer.dart (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/8893001/diff/1001/frog/leg/namer.dart#newcode81
frog/leg/namer.dart:81: String instanceName(Element element) {
On 2011/12/09 14:27:44, ngeoffray wrote:
> Why do you need instanceName and constructorBodyName? Why not just calling
> getName and switching on the element?

Still need constructorBodyName, since the super-call doesn't have the right
Element.
Done.