Correctly report the type of initializing formals declared without an explicit type to be the type …

Correctly report the type of initializing formals declared without an explicit type to be the type of the corresponding field.

BUG=http://dartbug.com/11281
R=gbracha@google.com, hausner@google.com

Committed: https://code.google.com/p/dart/source/detail?r=28349

[hausner, 2013-10-07 23:03:08]

LGTM with comments.

https://codereview.chromium.org/26346002/diff/1/runtime/vm/parser.cc
File runtime/vm/parser.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/26346002/diff/1/runtime/vm/parser.cc#newcode1421
runtime/vm/parser.cc:1421: // constructor is fully parsed.
corrected -> set to the type of the respective field

(or something similar)

https://codereview.chromium.org/26346002/diff/1/runtime/vm/parser.cc#newcode1461
runtime/vm/parser.cc:1461: // constructor is fully parsed.
ditto

https://codereview.chromium.org/26346002/diff/1/runtime/vm/parser.cc#newcode2570
runtime/vm/parser.cc:2570: // Parameter type was already set in diet parsing:
overwrite.
nit: I don't think we use the term diet parsing in the VM.

... was set to dynamic when parsing the class declaration ...

https://codereview.chromium.org/26346002/diff/1/tests/lib/mirrors/initializin...
File tests/lib/mirrors/initializing_formals_test.dart (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/26346002/diff/1/tests/lib/mirrors/initializin...
tests/lib/mirrors/initializing_formals_test.dart:23: Class.explicitType(num
this.intField);
Try also with explicit dynamic.

https://codereview.chromium.org/26346002/diff/1/tests/lib/mirrors/initializin...
tests/lib/mirrors/initializing_formals_test.dart:25: }
Should you cover factories and forwarding constructors?

[rmacnak, 2013-10-08 01:01:01]

https://codereview.chromium.org/26346002/diff/1/runtime/vm/parser.cc
File runtime/vm/parser.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/26346002/diff/1/runtime/vm/parser.cc#newcode1421
runtime/vm/parser.cc:1421: // constructor is fully parsed.
On 2013/10/07 23:03:08, hausner wrote:
> corrected -> set to the type of the respective field
> 
> (or something similar)

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/26346002/diff/1/runtime/vm/parser.cc#newcode1461
runtime/vm/parser.cc:1461: // constructor is fully parsed.
On 2013/10/07 23:03:08, hausner wrote:
> ditto

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/26346002/diff/1/runtime/vm/parser.cc#newcode2570
runtime/vm/parser.cc:2570: // Parameter type was already set in diet parsing:
overwrite.
On 2013/10/07 23:03:08, hausner wrote:
> nit: I don't think we use the term diet parsing in the VM.
> 
> ... was set to dynamic when parsing the class declaration ...

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/26346002/diff/1/tests/lib/mirrors/initializin...
File tests/lib/mirrors/initializing_formals_test.dart (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/26346002/diff/1/tests/lib/mirrors/initializin...
tests/lib/mirrors/initializing_formals_test.dart:23: Class.explicitType(num
this.intField);
On 2013/10/07 23:03:08, hausner wrote:
> Try also with explicit dynamic.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/26346002/diff/1/tests/lib/mirrors/initializin...
tests/lib/mirrors/initializing_formals_test.dart:25: }
On 2013/10/07 23:03:08, hausner wrote:
> Should you cover factories and forwarding constructors?

Initializing formals aren't allowed there.

[gbracha, 2013-10-08 01:05:45]

test lgtm

[rmacnak, 2013-10-08 01:09:21]

Committed patchset #2 manually as r28349 (presubmit successful).