implement user-defined nSM, Object members on functions

implement user-defined nSM, Object members on functions
fix #591 and fix #59

R=vsm@google.com

Committed: https://github.com/dart-lang/dev_compiler/commit/d6820e299111874c1ade6eb04e83735cc183d08b

[Jennifer Messerly, 2016-06-16 22:22:12]

Description was changed from

==========
(not ready for review) implement user-defined nSM
==========

to

==========
implement user-defined nSM, Object members on functions 
fix #591 and fix #59
==========

[Jennifer Messerly, 2016-06-16 22:22:12]

jmesserly@google.com changed reviewers:
+ vsm@google.com

[vsm, 2016-06-16 23:41:13]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2061373003/diff/60001/lib/src/compiler/code_g...
File lib/src/compiler/code_generator.dart (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2061373003/diff/60001/lib/src/compiler/code_g...
lib/src/compiler/code_generator.dart:4260: if (expr is PropertyAccess) {
Is this sufficient?  I.e., what about FunctionExpressions or other expressions
with a FunctionType?

[Jennifer Messerly, 2016-06-16 23:44:14]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2061373003/diff/60001/lib/src/compiler/code_g...
File lib/src/compiler/code_generator.dart (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2061373003/diff/60001/lib/src/compiler/code_g...
lib/src/compiler/code_generator.dart:4260: if (expr is PropertyAccess) {
On 2016/06/16 23:41:13, vsm wrote:
> Is this sufficient?  I.e., what about FunctionExpressions or other expressions
> with a FunctionType?

I think those should be handled by isNullable (I started by taking this code
from isNullable)... mainly I wanted to break the "return true" branch. But
you're right, checking for function types would be *way* simpler. Thanks, I'll
fix that. :)

[vsm, 2016-06-17 00:07:16]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/2061373003/diff/80001/tool/input_sdk/private/...
File tool/input_sdk/private/ddc_runtime/operations.dart (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2061373003/diff/80001/tool/input_sdk/private/...
tool/input_sdk/private/ddc_runtime/operations.dart:103: if (args.length > 1 &&
Why not > 0?

[Jennifer Messerly, 2016-06-17 00:13:14]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2061373003/diff/80001/tool/input_sdk/private/...
File tool/input_sdk/private/ddc_runtime/operations.dart (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2061373003/diff/80001/tool/input_sdk/private/...
tool/input_sdk/private/ddc_runtime/operations.dart:103: if (args.length > 1 &&
On 2016/06/17 00:07:16, vsm wrote:
> Why not > 0?

good catch. Done.

[Jennifer Messerly, 2016-06-21 20:21:46]

Hey Vijay, do you mind taking a look at one change in the latest patch set?
Discovered when I rebased.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2061373003/diff/110001/lib/src/compiler/code_...
File lib/src/compiler/code_generator.dart (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2061373003/diff/110001/lib/src/compiler/code_...
lib/src/compiler/code_generator.dart:720: if (member.name.name == 'call' &&
!member.isSetter) {
When I merged, I had to fix how recently implemented "call" interacted with
"noSuchMethod". Comment below attempts to describe it :)

[vsm, 2016-06-22 13:27:32]

lgtm

[Jennifer Messerly, 2016-06-23 00:18:30]

Description was changed from

==========
implement user-defined nSM, Object members on functions 
fix #591 and fix #59
==========

to

==========
implement user-defined nSM, Object members on functions
fix #591 and fix #59

R=vsm@google.com

Committed:
https://github.com/dart-lang/dev_compiler/commit/d6820e299111874c1ade6eb04e83...
==========

[Jennifer Messerly, 2016-06-23 00:18:31]

Committed patchset #7 (id:110001) manually as
d6820e299111874c1ade6eb04e83735cc183d08b (presubmit successful).