Issue 8801. Report problems for missing [] or []=

Issue 8801. Report problems for missing [] or []=
https://code.google.com/p/dart/issues/detail?id=8801

R=brianwilkerson@google.com
BUG=

Committed: https://code.google.com/p/dart/source/detail?r=23078

[Brian Wilkerson, 2013-05-23 14:02:54]

DBC

https://codereview.chromium.org/15813002/diff/1/editor/tools/plugins/com.goog...
File
editor/tools/plugins/com.google.dart.engine/src/com/google/dart/engine/error/StaticTypeWarningCode.java
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/15813002/diff/1/editor/tools/plugins/com.goog...
editor/tools/plugins/com.google.dart.engine/src/com/google/dart/engine/error/StaticTypeWarningCode.java:197:
UNDEFINED_OPERATOR("There is no such operator '%s' in '%s'"),
It isn't clear to me that the section of the specification above would take
precedence over the section that I originally used to classify this error.

https://codereview.chromium.org/15813002/diff/1/editor/tools/plugins/com.goog...
File
editor/tools/plugins/com.google.dart.engine/src/com/google/dart/engine/internal/resolver/ElementResolver.java
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/15813002/diff/1/editor/tools/plugins/com.goog...
editor/tools/plugins/com.google.dart.engine/src/com/google/dart/engine/internal/resolver/ElementResolver.java:711:
// getter
I don't understand why you rewrote this method. The only semantic change I can
see is that now we can get two errors reported for an expression like "a[0]++",
which doesn't seem like a good thing. Let's talk so you can explain it to me.

[scheglov, 2013-05-23 15:34:42]

PTAL

https://codereview.chromium.org/15813002/diff/1/editor/tools/plugins/com.goog...
File
editor/tools/plugins/com.google.dart.engine/src/com/google/dart/engine/error/StaticTypeWarningCode.java
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/15813002/diff/1/editor/tools/plugins/com.goog...
editor/tools/plugins/com.google.dart.engine/src/com/google/dart/engine/error/StaticTypeWarningCode.java:197:
UNDEFINED_OPERATOR("There is no such operator '%s' in '%s'"),
On 2013/05/23 14:02:54, Brian Wilkerson wrote:
> It isn't clear to me that the section of the specification above would take
> precedence over the section that I originally used to classify this error.

Discussed offline.
Applied some changes.

https://codereview.chromium.org/15813002/diff/1/editor/tools/plugins/com.goog...
File
editor/tools/plugins/com.google.dart.engine/src/com/google/dart/engine/internal/resolver/ElementResolver.java
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/15813002/diff/1/editor/tools/plugins/com.goog...
editor/tools/plugins/com.google.dart.engine/src/com/google/dart/engine/internal/resolver/ElementResolver.java:711:
// getter
On 2013/05/23 14:02:54, Brian Wilkerson wrote:
> I don't understand why you rewrote this method. The only semantic change I can
> see is that now we can get two errors reported for an expression like
"a[0]++",
> which doesn't seem like a good thing. Let's talk so you can explain it to me.

We need to check both in case if target defined only one, but actually used in
both contexts.
But we don't want to report 2 problems.
Tweaked to do only once.

[Brian Wilkerson, 2013-05-23 16:18:12]

LGTM

[scheglov, 2013-05-23 16:31:19]

Committed patchset #2 manually as r23078 (presubmit successful).