Port the remaining of dart:core to the unified corelib.

Port the remaining of dart:core to the unified corelib.

This also adds support for injecting private fields and functions from
class patches.

BUG=

Committed: https://code.google.com/p/dart/source/detail?r=10156

[Anders Johnsen, 2012-08-01 13:29:35]

(depends on https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10829102/)

[Mads Ager (google), 2012-08-01 13:48:34]

The actual change looks good. However, I don't think we should duplicate more
files than necessary. Duplicating in the first place is confusing. Can you undo
the changes that has nothing to do with patching?

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/corelib/unified/core/b...
File corelib/unified/core/bool.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/corelib/unified/core/b...
corelib/unified/core/bool.dart:1: // Copyright (c) 2011, the Dart project
authors.  Please see the AUTHORS file
Let's not duplicate all of the files that are not changed. That will only lead
to extra confusion. Let us stick to only duplicating the files that need
patching.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/corelib/unified/core/i...
File corelib/unified/core/implementation/completer.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/corelib/unified/core/i...
corelib/unified/core/implementation/completer.dart:1: // Copyright 2012 Google
Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Wrong copyright notice.

I would remove this again. No patching required, so let's not duplicate this.
Also, I don't see the need for moving it out of future_implementation.dart?

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/corelib/unified/core/i...
File corelib/unified/core/implementation/expando.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/corelib/unified/core/i...
corelib/unified/core/implementation/expando.dart:5: class
ExpandoImplementation<T> implements Expando<T> {
This is an extremely confusing diff. Did you copy some XMLDocument file to edit
for this? :)

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/corelib/unified/core/i...
File corelib/unified/core/implementation/future.dart (left):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/corelib/unified/core/i...
corelib/unified/core/implementation/future.dart:215: class CompleterImpl<T>
implements Completer<T> {
Why move this to a separate file? I would leave future_implementation alone for
now since it doesn't require patching.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/lib/compiler/implement...
File lib/compiler/implementation/compiler.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/lib/compiler/implement...
lib/compiler/implementation/compiler.dart:628: function.patch = patchElement;
Isn't there a setPatch method that should be used here? Something to do with
caching?

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/lib/compiler/implement...
File lib/compiler/implementation/elements/elements.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/lib/compiler/implement...
lib/compiler/implementation/elements/elements.dart:453: other.kind, enclosing,
other.cachedNode);
These are arguments to the this call. Align as arguments (align 'name' and
'other.kind').

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/lib/compiler/implement...
lib/compiler/implementation/elements/elements.dart:538: variableList = new
VariableListElement(other.kind, other.modifiers, enclosing);
Long line.

[Anders Johnsen, 2012-08-01 14:21:09]

PTAL

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/corelib/unified/core/i...
File corelib/unified/core/implementation/completer.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/corelib/unified/core/i...
corelib/unified/core/implementation/completer.dart:1: // Copyright 2012 Google
Inc. All Rights Reserved.
On 2012/08/01 13:48:34, Mads Ager wrote:
> Wrong copyright notice.
> 
> I would remove this again. No patching required, so let's not duplicate this.
> Also, I don't see the need for moving it out of future_implementation.dart?

I'll remove it again.

The reason for moving them out was to have a 1-1 mapping between declarations
and definitions of core/coreimpl classes, also in the file names.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/corelib/unified/core/i...
File corelib/unified/core/implementation/expando.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/corelib/unified/core/i...
corelib/unified/core/implementation/expando.dart:5: class
ExpandoImplementation<T> implements Expando<T> {
On 2012/08/01 13:48:34, Mads Ager wrote:
> This is an extremely confusing diff. Did you copy some XMLDocument file to
edit
> for this? :)

Emm, waw, diff tool trying to be too clever. :)

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/corelib/unified/core/i...
File corelib/unified/core/implementation/future.dart (left):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/corelib/unified/core/i...
corelib/unified/core/implementation/future.dart:215: class CompleterImpl<T>
implements Completer<T> {
On 2012/08/01 13:48:34, Mads Ager wrote:
> Why move this to a separate file? I would leave future_implementation alone
for
> now since it doesn't require patching.

Reverting, see other comment.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/lib/compiler/implement...
File lib/compiler/implementation/compiler.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/lib/compiler/implement...
lib/compiler/implementation/compiler.dart:628: function.patch = patchElement;
On 2012/08/01 13:48:34, Mads Ager wrote:
> Isn't there a setPatch method that should be used here? Something to do with
> caching?

Very nice spotted, I must have confused myself by the public field.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/lib/compiler/implement...
File lib/compiler/implementation/elements/elements.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/lib/compiler/implement...
lib/compiler/implementation/elements/elements.dart:453: other.kind, enclosing,
other.cachedNode);
On 2012/08/01 13:48:34, Mads Ager wrote:
> These are arguments to the this call. Align as arguments (align 'name' and
> 'other.kind').

Done.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/1/lib/compiler/implement...
lib/compiler/implementation/elements/elements.dart:538: variableList = new
VariableListElement(other.kind, other.modifiers, enclosing);
On 2012/08/01 13:48:34, Mads Ager wrote:
> Long line.

Done.

[Mads Ager (google), 2012-08-01 14:33:08]

LGTM

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/51/corelib/unified/core/...
File corelib/unified/core/expando.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/51/corelib/unified/core/...
corelib/unified/core/expando.dart:8: interface Expando<T> default
ExpandoImplementation<T> {
Have you made ExpandoImplementation public because that is what is usually done
for the rest? I'm not sure that it makes much sense to have
ExpandoImplementation be public?

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/51/corelib/unified/core/...
File corelib/unified/core/options.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/51/corelib/unified/core/...
corelib/unified/core/options.dart:1: // Copyright (c) 2012, the Dart project
authors.  Please see the AUTHORS file
Remove the duplication of this one?

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/51/corelib/unified/core/...
File corelib/unified/core/stopwatch.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/51/corelib/unified/core/...
corelib/unified/core/stopwatch.dart:1: // Copyright (c) 2011, the Dart project
authors.  Please see the AUTHORS file
Ditto?

[Anders Johnsen, 2012-08-01 14:39:08]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/51/corelib/unified/core/...
File corelib/unified/core/expando.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/51/corelib/unified/core/...
corelib/unified/core/expando.dart:8: interface Expando<T> default
ExpandoImplementation<T> {
On 2012/08/01 14:33:08, Mads Ager wrote:
> Have you made ExpandoImplementation public because that is what is usually
done
> for the rest? I'm not sure that it makes much sense to have
> ExpandoImplementation be public?

I did it to get around a privacy issue. dart:core imports coreimpl, but that
also means that if I put _Expando in coreimpl, it'll not be accessible from
here. Should we put the implementation in this file as _Expando?

(Note that the old version _sources_ it in from mock.dart)

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/51/corelib/unified/core/...
File corelib/unified/core/options.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/51/corelib/unified/core/...
corelib/unified/core/options.dart:1: // Copyright (c) 2012, the Dart project
authors.  Please see the AUTHORS file
On 2012/08/01 14:33:08, Mads Ager wrote:
> Remove the duplication of this one?

The coreimpl version is changed for this one, but I see what you're saying -
removing.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/51/corelib/unified/core/...
File corelib/unified/core/stopwatch.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/51/corelib/unified/core/...
corelib/unified/core/stopwatch.dart:1: // Copyright (c) 2011, the Dart project
authors.  Please see the AUTHORS file
On 2012/08/01 14:33:08, Mads Ager wrote:
> Ditto?

Ditto.

[Mads Ager (google), 2012-08-01 14:42:37]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/51/corelib/unified/core/...
File corelib/unified/core/expando.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/51/corelib/unified/core/...
corelib/unified/core/expando.dart:8: interface Expando<T> default
ExpandoImplementation<T> {
On 2012/08/01 14:39:08, ajohnsen wrote:
> On 2012/08/01 14:33:08, Mads Ager wrote:
> > Have you made ExpandoImplementation public because that is what is usually
> done
> > for the rest? I'm not sure that it makes much sense to have
> > ExpandoImplementation be public?
> 
> I did it to get around a privacy issue. dart:core imports coreimpl, but that
> also means that if I put _Expando in coreimpl, it'll not be accessible from
> here. Should we put the implementation in this file as _Expando?
> 
> (Note that the old version _sources_ it in from mock.dart)

I think this is fine. But maybe you can follow up offline with the author of
Expando to clearify its usage and why it was implemented this way?

[Anders Johnsen, 2012-08-02 10:17:41]

Committing.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/51/corelib/unified/core/...
File corelib/unified/core/expando.dart (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830117/diff/51/corelib/unified/core/...
corelib/unified/core/expando.dart:8: interface Expando<T> default
ExpandoImplementation<T> {
On 2012/08/01 14:42:37, Mads Ager wrote:
> On 2012/08/01 14:39:08, ajohnsen wrote:
> > On 2012/08/01 14:33:08, Mads Ager wrote:
> > > Have you made ExpandoImplementation public because that is what is usually
> > done
> > > for the rest? I'm not sure that it makes much sense to have
> > > ExpandoImplementation be public?
> > 
> > I did it to get around a privacy issue. dart:core imports coreimpl, but that
> > also means that if I put _Expando in coreimpl, it'll not be accessible from
> > here. Should we put the implementation in this file as _Expando?
> > 
> > (Note that the old version _sources_ it in from mock.dart)
> 
> I think this is fine. But maybe you can follow up offline with the author of
> Expando to clearify its usage and why it was implemented this way?

Will do!