The current specification only prohibits expressions statements where the
expression *is* a map, not those that *start with* a map.
Implementations have always rejected those starting with a map.
Bug: http://dartbug.com/725
Change-Id: I805a6f82d1afdcf335aff73e74dac1f14e5a6afe
Reviewed-on: https://dart-review.googlesource.com/71247
Commit-Queue: Lasse R.H. Nielsen <lrn@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Erik Ernst <eernst@google.com>
In changing the proposed spec to address comments in a way that was intended to be
non-breaking, I accidentally introduced some new (unintended) restrictions. This
fixes the spec, rolls back the change in analyzer, and adjusts the language tests
appropriately.
Change-Id: I487b0eaacbfa1447d4ee909c0a56e435c2088990
Reviewed-on: https://dart-review.googlesource.com/70462
Reviewed-by: Mike Fairhurst <mfairhurst@google.com>
Also remove 64-bit constraint on integer literals when compiling to JavaScript.
Effectively, all integer literals are treated the same way when compiling to JavaScript numbers.
Change-Id: Ib625457d65c40600291edbf391c82f37ad27701a
Reviewed-on: https://dart-review.googlesource.com/70144
Commit-Queue: Lasse R.H. Nielsen <lrn@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Erik Ernst <eernst@google.com>
We need to clarify the following case:
`dynamic foo() => print('');`,
`dynamic bar() { return print(''); }`
that is, using `return e` where `e` has type `void`, when the return
type of the enclosing function is `dynamic` (inferred or explicit).
We do not currently have any elements in the generalized-void.md
whitelist for that, so it's an error. However, invalid_returns.md
from https://dart-review.googlesource.com/c/sdk/+/60401 implies
(patchset 6: line 19-20 and 34-35) that it is allowed.
It is my impression that we agree on invalid_returns.md, and also
that it describes the current behavior (maybe not 100%?).
This indicates to me that we should, probably, add an element to
the above-mentioned whitelist to allow it.
This CL makes that change to generalized-void.md.
Change-Id: I0326081960deda907b3b4ff34bd2d60f7c9dc35b
Reviewed-on: https://dart-review.googlesource.com/64341
Reviewed-by: Erik Ernst <eernst@google.com>
The issue was raised recently that there must be generated forwarders
for some method signatures that we had not previously mentioned in
nosuchmethod-forwarders.md: Private methods with an inaccessible name,
that is, private methods declared in a different library than the
current target of nSM forwarder generation.
Given that such forwarders are semantically significant (a tear-off
performed in the library where the abstract private method declaration
is located would tear off a generated forwarder, rather than causing
an invocation of `noSuchMethod`), we need to specify this.
This CL adds such a specification to nosuchmethod-forwarders.md.
This CL addresses SDK issue #33725, and SDK issue #33727 is related
being concerned with the implementation in the common front
end.
Change-Id: Iedbcdd8b4c8df95c6038022f72b3211ec1b76649
Reviewed-on: https://dart-review.googlesource.com/64380
Reviewed-by: Erik Ernst <eernst@google.com>
This mostly documents and regularizes existing (post bug fix) semantics,
with a small additional restriction on returning `void` from an async
function.
Change-Id: Ic1a302aeb666fa73ca2b7e23072394490bb4fe76
Reviewed-on: https://dart-review.googlesource.com/60401
Reviewed-by: Lasse R.H. Nielsen <lrn@google.com>
This CL adds a new feature specification for 'generic function
instantiation' (aka partial specialization, type-curried invocation,
etc.), which amounts to implicitly obtaining a non-generic function
from a denotation of a generic function when the typing requires the
latter.
This feature spec relies on type inference, but as a black box (so
it can hardly be incompatible with any current or future version of
type inference in Dart).
Note that it is a restricted version of generic function
instantiation which is specified here, it only supports global and
static functions and instance methods; function literals and first
class function values are not supported.
I just learned from Vijay (Mar 23, 3pm CET) that first class functions
_do_ support generic function instantiation in some existing
implementations. So maybe there is no problem supporting them, and
we should just eliminate that restriction?
Here is a rendered version of the document, refreshed to match patch
set 19: https://gist.github.com/eernstg/bf816d3495e9b87ab6eb958ba707d016
Change-Id: Ie1fd601d3e359bfb5f4616f8ec68a110f42e01b7
Reviewed-on: https://dart-review.googlesource.com/47043
Reviewed-by: Lasse R.H. Nielsen <lrn@google.com>
The current specification seems to allow (or even mandate) that a
redirecting constructor (factory or generative) must be considered as a
syntactic shorthand for an invocation of the redirection target, with
no checks applied statically or dynamically according to the
declarations in the redirected constructor. So the following would be
OK:
class A {
A(num n) { print(n); }
A.foo(int i): this(i);
}
main() => new A.foo(3.0);
This CL changes dartLangSpec.tex to mandate all the checks (static
and dynamic) for the declaration of the redirecting constructor as
well as each one of the redirection targets.
Note that the analyzer already rejects the above program, which
lessens the disruption and the implementation burden, but compilers
would presumably need to have the dynamic checks implemented.
Underlying issues: https://github.com/dart-lang/sdk/issues/31590,
https://github.com/dart-lang/sdk/issues/32049,
https://github.com/dart-lang/sdk/issues/32511.
Change-Id: Icc15da6b817e4e678cdfc8829a1e06458756eb4b
Reviewed-on: https://dart-review.googlesource.com/28140
Reviewed-by: Leaf Petersen <leafp@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Lasse R.H. Nielsen <lrn@google.com>
We did not previously prevent `class C implements FutureOr<int> ..` and
similar declarations. However, it offers only very little value to
allow this, and possibly creates some complications. This CL makes all
these subtype relationships a compile-time error.
The wording of the constraint on `\WITH{} clause` was also adjusted to
remove some potential interpretations which are unintended (like
preventing `with List<dynamic>`, which should be OK).
Change-Id: I626c2767befa7a3cb3092b0ba5cb463e9456d431
Reviewed-on: https://dart-review.googlesource.com/63583
Reviewed-by: Lasse R.H. Nielsen <lrn@google.com>
We noted in issue https://github.com/dart-lang/sdk/issues/33709 that
the language specification prevents usage of `Null` as the bound
of a type variable, because that makes the bound a subtype of
the type variable itself (which is otherwise a symptom of having
a cyclic declaration like `X extends X`).
This CL adjusts the wording such that it will be possible to use
`Null` (or whatever the denoteable bottom type is called) as a
bound.
Change-Id: I46a5ce6055f3af322a6b93ac38ca2829ce23a26c
Reviewed-on: https://dart-review.googlesource.com/63420
Reviewed-by: Lasse R.H. Nielsen <lrn@google.com>
Argh, the `git cl upload` was waiting for an `ENTER` press when I
landed CL 56487. This CL just deletes that TODO comment.
Change-Id: I58843d8ae984363ca1b8bacd2f735efa50c9b666
Reviewed-on: https://dart-review.googlesource.com/60249
Reviewed-by: Erik Ernst <eernst@google.com>
As of patchset 5: The ruleset concerning class member conflicts
(apart from simple name clashes) has now been simplified
considerably, and it's expressed in one location, in a new section
(the locations where we previously had such rules are now
`\commentary{}` with a reference to the new section).
The old rules and the new simplified rules specify the same set
of conflicts (in that sense, patchset 4 == patchset 5).
The old description below gives details about what was changed
from the start of this CL until patchset 4.
------------------------------- OLD description:
Added conflict for constructor and setter with "the same name".
Discussed the inconsistent approach to conflicts between named
constructors and instance members with Lasse; we agreed that it
is confusing if we allow the constructor `C.n` to coexist with the
instance method/getter `n` and instance setter `n=`, except that
they must be inherited rather than declared in the enclosing class
`C`, so I adjusted the wording such that only _static_ members
conflict with named constructors.
One more reason why there is no conflict between `C.n` and an instance
member named `n` or `n=` is that the latter can _never_ be denoted
by `C.n` (but static members can be denoted by `C.n`, also in `C`).
Change-Id: I012e772ae6473fddd8f9944553d69e6a6ceeb2f9
Reviewed-on: https://dart-review.googlesource.com/56800
Reviewed-by: Leaf Petersen <leafp@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Lasse R.H. Nielsen <lrn@google.com>
This CL adds an example to super-bounded-types.md in order to motivate
the definition of what it means for a parameterized type based on a
type alias to be super-bounded. The definition says that we must check
the actual type arguments relative to the formal type parameter
list of the given `typedef` as well as the right hand side, replacing
the formals by the given actual type arguments. The example shows that
the right hand side can be ill-bounded even though the check that we
apply based on the formal type parameter bounds (that is, the check
that we apply to class types) succeeds.
A rendered version of super-bounded-types.md corresponding to patchset
6 is available here:
https://gist.github.com/eernstg/fc12eeb23064a2578a936b443461dde4.
Change-Id: I33dc6ced592f53160bc6f933558bfface46cd329
Reviewed-on: https://dart-review.googlesource.com/56668
Commit-Queue: Erik Ernst <eernst@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Leaf Petersen <leafp@google.com>
This CL changes dartLangSpec.tex to say that 'closurization' takes
place (rather than just saying that it's a 'function') when a
global/local/static function is torn off, just like it always did
for instance methods. Also, it standardizes on using the phrase
'function object' to denote the run-time entity obtained from such
a closurization.
This addresses the non-generic parts of the request in #31665.
Change-Id: I6967a74df178fbb26af0f572b0471219d3169e4f
Reviewed-on: https://dart-review.googlesource.com/46860
Commit-Queue: Erik Ernst <eernst@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Lasse R.H. Nielsen <lrn@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Leaf Petersen <leafp@google.com>
Sergey pointed out a couple of name clashes, and I renamed some indices
in order to avoid them. At the same time, I fixed a couple of typos
and adjusted the whitespace to be more similar to other *.md files.
Finally, I adjusted the wording involving 'algorithmic' and 'syntax
directed' in order to make it explicit that they stand for the same
thing.
Change-Id: Ic03b907f4bdc722d9ba218d38077addf9cc4a777
Reviewed-on: https://dart-review.googlesource.com/50981
Reviewed-by: Leaf Petersen <leafp@google.com>
Lasse Reichstein Holst Nielsen