Properly handle implicit closure function when a generic function.

Properly handle implicit closure function when a generic function.
The parent function of an implicit closure function is not the enclosing
function, but the function being closurised. This requires special handling in a
few places.

R=rmacnak@google.com

Committed: https://github.com/dart-lang/sdk/commit/e4ff8df6e6875d1788c7e0e20fef61c17a26a7fb

[regis, 2017-04-24 23:29:52]

regis@google.com changed reviewers:
+ rmacnak@google.com

[rmacnak, 2017-04-25 19:21:42]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2835363002/diff/1/runtime/vm/object.cc
File runtime/vm/object.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2835363002/diff/1/runtime/vm/object.cc#newcod...
runtime/vm/object.cc:6365: const Function& function = Function::Handle(
I think this output is only used for debug printing in the VM. Can we keep the
current format or some other identifying mark in the string? It's helpful to
distinguish the implicit closure function.

[regis, 2017-04-25 19:57:26]

Thanks!

PTAL

https://codereview.chromium.org/2835363002/diff/1/runtime/vm/object.cc
File runtime/vm/object.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2835363002/diff/1/runtime/vm/object.cc#newcod...
runtime/vm/object.cc:6365: const Function& function = Function::Handle(
On 2017/04/25 19:21:42, rmacnak wrote:
> I think this output is only used for debug printing in the VM. Can we keep the
> current format or some other identifying mark in the string? It's helpful to
> distinguish the implicit closure function.

OK, I removed the change.

[rmacnak, 2017-04-25 20:04:22]

lgtm

[regis, 2017-04-25 20:35:25]

Description was changed from

==========
Properly handle implicit closure function when a generic function.
The parent function of an implicit closure function is not the enclosing
function, but the function being closurised. This requires special handling in a
few places.
==========

to

==========
Properly handle implicit closure function when a generic function.
The parent function of an implicit closure function is not the enclosing
function, but the function being closurised. This requires special handling in a
few places.

R=rmacnak@google.com

Committed:
https://github.com/dart-lang/sdk/commit/e4ff8df6e6875d1788c7e0e20fef61c17a26a7fb
==========

[regis, 2017-04-25 20:35:26]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001) manually as
e4ff8df6e6875d1788c7e0e20fef61c17a26a7fb (presubmit successful).

[siva, 2017-04-25 21:58:06]

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

[siva, 2017-04-25 21:58:06]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2835363002/diff/20001/runtime/vm/flow_graph_c...
File runtime/vm/flow_graph_compiler_x64.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2835363002/diff/20001/runtime/vm/flow_graph_c...
runtime/vm/flow_graph_compiler_x64.cc:1100: }
Should this assert also happen on other architectures?

[regis, 2017-04-25 22:08:34]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2835363002/diff/20001/runtime/vm/flow_graph_c...
File runtime/vm/flow_graph_compiler_x64.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2835363002/diff/20001/runtime/vm/flow_graph_c...
runtime/vm/flow_graph_compiler_x64.cc:1100: }
On 2017/04/25 21:58:06, siva wrote:
> Should this assert also happen on other architectures?

I should probably not have committed these asserts, especially since
FLAG_reify_generic_functions is false by default and not working yet. They help
me verify my work in progress and are only temporary. Having them on x64 only is
good enough for now. Sorry for the sloppiness.

[siva, 2017-04-25 22:31:33]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2835363002/diff/20001/runtime/vm/flow_graph_c...
File runtime/vm/flow_graph_compiler_x64.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2835363002/diff/20001/runtime/vm/flow_graph_c...
runtime/vm/flow_graph_compiler_x64.cc:1100: }
On 2017/04/25 22:08:33, regis wrote:
> On 2017/04/25 21:58:06, siva wrote:
> > Should this assert also happen on other architectures?
> 
> I should probably not have committed these asserts, especially since
> FLAG_reify_generic_functions is false by default and not working yet. They
help
> me verify my work in progress and are only temporary. Having them on x64 only
is
> good enough for now. Sorry for the sloppiness.

Sounds good, no need to add to other targets yet, was just wondering about it.