Specify mapUri for directories

Specify mapUri for directories

R=paulberry@google.com, scheglov@google.com

Committed: https://code.google.com/p/dart/source/detail?r=43364

[Brian Wilkerson, 2015-02-02 18:07:28]

brianwilkerson@google.com changed reviewers:
+ paulberry@google.com

[scheglov, 2015-02-02 18:17:52]

scheglov@google.com changed reviewers:
+ scheglov@google.com

[scheglov, 2015-02-02 18:17:52]

https://codereview.chromium.org/896513002/diff/1/pkg/analysis_server/tool/spe...
File pkg/analysis_server/tool/spec/spec_input.html (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/896513002/diff/1/pkg/analysis_server/tool/spe...
pkg/analysis_server/tool/spec/spec_input.html:1661: If the root of the execution
context is a directory rather than a
What is "the root of the execution context"?
Is it defined somewhere?

"createContext" says "execution context for the executable file with the given
path", it does not mention root or folders.

[Paul Berry, 2015-02-02 19:07:58]

lgtm assuming my & Konstantin's questions are addressed.

https://codereview.chromium.org/896513002/diff/1/pkg/analysis_server/tool/spe...
File pkg/analysis_server/tool/spec/spec_input.html (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/896513002/diff/1/pkg/analysis_server/tool/spe...
pkg/analysis_server/tool/spec/spec_input.html:1661: If the root of the execution
context is a directory rather than a
On 2015/02/02 18:17:52, scheglov wrote:
> What is "the root of the execution context"?
> Is it defined somewhere?
> 
> "createContext" says "execution context for the executable file with the given
> path", it does not mention root or folders.

I'm not terribly familiar with this part of the API, so hopefully the questions
below will make sense:

Do you perhaps mean something like "if the file or uri parameter specifies a
path that is a directory rather than a file"?

Should we also specify what happens if the file or uri parameter specifies a
path that does not exist on the filesystem?

[Brian Wilkerson, 2015-02-02 20:30:51]

PTAL

[scheglov, 2015-02-02 20:35:43]

LGTM with invalid context id/root question.

https://codereview.chromium.org/896513002/diff/20001/pkg/analysis_server/tool...
File pkg/analysis_server/tool/spec/spec_input.html (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/896513002/diff/20001/pkg/analysis_server/tool...
pkg/analysis_server/tool/spec/spec_input.html:1676: will be generated.
Why not generate this error in response to execution.createContext ?

But yes, in "mapUri" it is still an error to pass an invalid "id".

[Brian Wilkerson, 2015-02-02 20:44:03]

https://codereview.chromium.org/896513002/diff/20001/pkg/analysis_server/tool...
File pkg/analysis_server/tool/spec/spec_input.html (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/896513002/diff/20001/pkg/analysis_server/tool...
pkg/analysis_server/tool/spec/spec_input.html:1676: will be generated.
> Why not generate this error in response to execution.createContext ?

The presence or absence of the resource, as well as the kind of the resource,
can change between the time createContext is sent and the time this request is
sent. That means we need to deal with it here in any case. It it therefore more
consistent with the rest of the API's design to ignore it at creation time and
deal with the problem at use time (see analysis.setAnalysisRoots for an
example).

[scheglov, 2015-02-02 20:47:04]

LGTM

https://codereview.chromium.org/896513002/diff/20001/pkg/analysis_server/tool...
File pkg/analysis_server/tool/spec/spec_input.html (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/896513002/diff/20001/pkg/analysis_server/tool...
pkg/analysis_server/tool/spec/spec_input.html:1676: will be generated.
On 2015/02/02 20:44:03, Brian Wilkerson wrote:
> > Why not generate this error in response to execution.createContext ?
> 
> The presence or absence of the resource, as well as the kind of the resource,
> can change between the time createContext is sent and the time this request is
> sent. That means we need to deal with it here in any case. It it therefore
more
> consistent with the rest of the API's design to ignore it at creation time and
> deal with the problem at use time (see analysis.setAnalysisRoots for an
> example).

Right.
Thank you for explaining this!

[Brian Wilkerson, 2015-02-02 22:46:02]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001) manually as 43364 (presubmit successful).