Refactor the IL for object allocation with type arguments.

Refactor the IL for object allocation with type arguments.

Two parts:

1. Change AllocateObjectWithBoundsCheck to a normal call that takes
four arguments on the stack using PushArgument IL instructions.
Before inputs were in registers and the instruction pushed them itself
before the runtime call. This make the code more compact and simplifies
the flow graph builder.

2. Simplify instructions for building constructor type arguments for another
special case to simplify the instruction pattern and generate smaller
code for that case.

R=srdjan@google.com

Committed: https://code.google.com/p/dart/source/detail?r=22943

[srdjan, 2013-05-21 14:59:14]

lgtm

[Florian Schneider, 2013-05-21 15:15:55]

Committed patchset #3 manually as r22943 (presubmit successful).

[regis, 2013-05-21 16:39:36]

LGTM

https://codereview.chromium.org/15564004/diff/11001/runtime/vm/intermediate_l...
File runtime/vm/intermediate_language_arm.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/15564004/diff/11001/runtime/vm/intermediate_l...
runtime/vm/intermediate_language_arm.cc:1620:
ASSERT(type_arguments().IsRawInstantiatedRaw(type_arguments().Length()));
Do I understand correctly that you only use this
ExtractConstructorTypeArgumentsInstr any more in the case where the
uninstantiated type arguments is set to null if the instantiator is null? A
comment would be useful.

[Florian Schneider, 2013-05-22 08:09:19]

On 2013/05/21 16:39:36, regis wrote:
> LGTM
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/15564004/diff/11001/runtime/vm/intermediate_l...
> File runtime/vm/intermediate_language_arm.cc (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/15564004/diff/11001/runtime/vm/intermediate_l...
> runtime/vm/intermediate_language_arm.cc:1620:
> ASSERT(type_arguments().IsRawInstantiatedRaw(type_arguments().Length()));
> Do I understand correctly that you only use this
> ExtractConstructorTypeArgumentsInstr any more in the case where the
> uninstantiated type arguments is set to null if the instantiator is null? A
> comment would be useful.

Yes. I'll add a comment. I'm also considering eliminating these instructions
because they are now just a null-comparison.