Ambiguous references do not necessarily cause compilation errors (issue 5736).

Ambiguous references do not necessarily cause compilation errors (issue 5736).
Triage related co19 test failures.
Committed: https://code.google.com/p/dart/source/detail?r=13987

[hausner, 2012-10-23 22:02:24]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/11232071/diff/1/runtime/vm/parser.cc
File runtime/vm/parser.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11232071/diff/1/runtime/vm/parser.cc#newcode7665
runtime/vm/parser.cc:7665: // malformed if type arguments have previously been
parsed.
indentation

[regis, 2012-10-23 22:30:25]

Thanks!

https://codereview.chromium.org/11232071/diff/1/runtime/vm/parser.cc
File runtime/vm/parser.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11232071/diff/1/runtime/vm/parser.cc#newcode7665
runtime/vm/parser.cc:7665: // malformed if type arguments have previously been
parsed.
On 2012/10/23 22:02:24, hausner wrote:
> indentation

Strange. I do not see this bad indentation in the source and there is no tab
character either.

[Ivan Posva, 2012-10-24 05:47:52]

https://codereview.chromium.org/11232071/diff/1/tests/co19/co19-runtime.status
File tests/co19/co19-runtime.status (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11232071/diff/1/tests/co19/co19-runtime.statu...
tests/co19/co19-runtime.status:5: # These tests need to be updated for new
optional parameter syntax and semantics, co19 issue 258:
Why did this line move? It should be unrelated to this current change.

[regis, 2012-10-24 16:50:31]

https://codereview.chromium.org/11232071/diff/1/tests/co19/co19-runtime.status
File tests/co19/co19-runtime.status (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11232071/diff/1/tests/co19/co19-runtime.statu...
tests/co19/co19-runtime.status:5: # These tests need to be updated for new
optional parameter syntax and semantics, co19 issue 258:
On 2012/10/24 05:47:53, Ivan Posva wrote:
> Why did this line move? It should be unrelated to this current change.

A new group of failing tests is introduced on line 12. These tests relate to
co19 issue 282, but some fail in production mode, some in checked mode. The
filters are therefore inside the group, i.e. after the comment header.
This group for co19 issue 258 had the filter before the comment header. This
could be a problem if you move the group somewhere and forget to move the
filter.

[Ivan Posva, 2012-10-24 17:20:09]

https://codereview.chromium.org/11232071/diff/1/tests/co19/co19-runtime.status
File tests/co19/co19-runtime.status (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11232071/diff/1/tests/co19/co19-runtime.statu...
tests/co19/co19-runtime.status:5: # These tests need to be updated for new
optional parameter syntax and semantics, co19 issue 258:
On 2012/10/24 16:50:32, regis wrote:
> On 2012/10/24 05:47:53, Ivan Posva wrote:
> > Why did this line move? It should be unrelated to this current change.
> 
> A new group of failing tests is introduced on line 12. These tests relate to
> co19 issue 282, but some fail in production mode, some in checked mode. The
> filters are therefore inside the group, i.e. after the comment header.
> This group for co19 issue 258 had the filter before the comment header. This
> could be a problem if you move the group somewhere and forget to move the
> filter. 

Thanks for the clarification.