Re-apply "Move the handling of operator[] into the new interceptors."

Re-apply "Move the handling of operator[] into the new interceptors."
Committed: https://code.google.com/p/dart/source/detail?r=16095

[ngeoffray, 2012-12-12 16:14:14]

Patch set 1 is the original. Patch set 2 contains the fix.

https://codereview.chromium.org/11316354/diff/3001/sdk/lib/_internal/compiler...
File sdk/lib/_internal/compiler/implementation/ssa/nodes.dart (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11316354/diff/3001/sdk/lib/_internal/compiler...
sdk/lib/_internal/compiler/implementation/ssa/nodes.dart:183: } else if
(result.block == null) {
This was the bug: we were adding a constant back into a usedBy list, but without
putting it in a block.

[kasperl, 2012-12-13 08:49:24]

LGTM. Nice fix.

https://codereview.chromium.org/11316354/diff/3001/sdk/lib/_internal/compiler...
File sdk/lib/_internal/compiler/implementation/ssa/nodes.dart (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11316354/diff/3001/sdk/lib/_internal/compiler...
sdk/lib/_internal/compiler/implementation/ssa/nodes.dart:183: } else if
(result.block == null) {
On 2012/12/12 16:14:14, ngeoffray wrote:
> This was the bug: we were adding a constant back into a usedBy list, but
without
> putting it in a block.

So we would have a constant in the constant map that got unused -- and then we
would decide to reuse it? Makes sense.

[kasperl, 2012-12-13 08:50:33]

Would it make sense to land the bug fix and the added verification stuff
(essentially patch set 2) as a separate thing? That seems simpler and then the
original patch should be able to go in without any hiccups.

[ngeoffray, 2012-12-13 09:56:02]

On 2012/12/13 08:50:33, kasperl wrote:
> Would it make sense to land the bug fix and the added verification stuff
> (essentially patch set 2) as a separate thing? That seems simpler and then the
> original patch should be able to go in without any hiccups.

Thanks Kasper. Fix apply in https://codereview.chromium.org/11569006/.