re-writes some static field negative tests for use with analyzer

re-writes some static field negative tests for use with analyzer

Committed: https://code.google.com/p/dart/source/detail?r=8628

[zundel, 2012-06-13 13:54:50]

@Peter, could you review the refactoring of the negative tests into a multitest?


@Konstantin,  The bug this refers to says we should look at what errors we want
to report, but when I looked at the output, the errors looked OK to me.  Added
JUnit test to demonstrate.

http://code.google.com/p/dart/issues/detail?id=1662

[scheglov, 2012-06-13 14:24:31]

LGTM

[ahe, 2012-06-13 14:27:24]

I think the test is correct, but I do have a few suggestions.

LGTM, but it would be really great if you address my comments.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10541140/diff/9/tests/language/static_...
File tests/language/static_field_test.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10541140/diff/9/tests/language/static_...
tests/language/static_field_test.dart:69: var foo = new
StaticField1RunNegativeTest();
Here I would say:

print(x);

to make sure x is "compiled".

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10541140/diff/9/tests/language/static_...
tests/language/static_field_test.dart:70: var x = foo.x;
I would put the /// comment on this line.

Also, I would not shadow "x"

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10541140/diff/9/tests/language/static_...
tests/language/static_field_test.dart:80: var m = foo.m;
Ditto. For all three remarks above.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10541140/diff/9/tests/language/static_...
tests/language/static_field_test.dart:90: foo.x = 1;
Ditto (all three).

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10541140/diff/9/tests/language/static_...
tests/language/static_field_test.dart:99: foo.m = 1; /// 04:continued
Ditto (all three).

[zundel, 2012-06-13 15:15:43]

@Peter:  PTAL

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10541140/diff/9/tests/language/static_...
File tests/language/static_field_test.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10541140/diff/9/tests/language/static_...
tests/language/static_field_test.dart:69: var foo = new
StaticField1RunNegativeTest();
On 2012/06/13 14:27:24, ahe wrote:
> Here I would say:
> 
> print(x);
> 
> to make sure x is "compiled".

Done.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10541140/diff/9/tests/language/static_...
tests/language/static_field_test.dart:70: var x = foo.x;
On 2012/06/13 14:27:24, ahe wrote:
> I would put the /// comment on this line.
> 
> Also, I would not shadow "x"

Got rid of the shadowing, but left the other in place so that in the base case
we see that the code actually would have worked.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10541140/diff/9/tests/language/static_...
tests/language/static_field_test.dart:99: foo.m = 1; /// 04:continued
On 2012/06/13 14:27:24, ahe wrote:
> Ditto (all three).


I'm not sure the original author of this test realized that no matter if the
method m() is static or an instance method, this line would fail.  In any case,
I did comment out the assignment for this test to get the base case to run.

[ahe, 2012-06-13 15:26:08]

LGTM

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10541140/diff/9001/tests/language/stat...
File tests/language/static_field_test.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10541140/diff/9001/tests/language/stat...
tests/language/static_field_test.dart:70: print(x); // to compile 'x'
Not a proper sentence: first letter should be uppercase, and terminated with a
period.