Update language status and rewrite a test

tests/language/not_enough_positional_arguments_test.dart

Index: tests/language/not_enough_positional_arguments_test.dart
diff --git a/tests/language/not_enough_positional_arguments_test.dart b/tests/language/not_enough_positional_arguments_test.dart
index a49f864cfe7d5853dd5e9aea8e0b3689d0ae57d7..b6cb3b505fda2b6938e3c7ead90d5b9e5bb366c0 100644
--- a/tests/language/not_enough_positional_arguments_test.dart
+++ b/tests/language/not_enough_positional_arguments_test.dart
@@ -5,17 +5,48 @@
 foo(a, [b]) {
 }
 
+bar(a, {b}) {
+}
+
 class A {
   A(a, [b]);
 }
 
 class B {
   B()
-    : super(b: 1) /// 01: runtime error
+    : super(b: 1)  /// 01: runtime error

[ahe, 2013/08/27 17:14:50]

This is not going to work.

When this line is removed, the code is still broken:

class B {
  B()
  ;
}

This is equivalent to:

class B {
  B() : super()
  ;
}

So the analyzer should reject this.

I suggest you change it like this:

class A {
  A();
  A.test(a, [b]);
}

class B {
  B()
      : super.test(b: 1) /// 01: runtime error, static warning
  ;
}

[Søren Gjesse, 2013/08/28 08:11:05]

Done.

+  ;
+}
+
+class C extends A {
+  C()
+    : super(b: 1)  /// 02: runtime error

[ahe, 2013/08/27 17:14:50]

Ditto.

[Søren Gjesse, 2013/08/28 08:11:05]

Done.

+  ;
+}
+
+class D {
+  D(a, {b});
+}
+
+class E {
+  E()
+    : super(b: 1)  /// 04: runtime error
+  ;
+}
+
+class F extends D {
+  F()
+    : super(b: 1)  /// 05: runtime error

[kustermann, 2013/08/27 16:33:06]

In the 'not_enough_positional_arguments_test/none' multitest, this line will not
be included.
So it's just 
  class F extends D {
    F();
  }
But class D does not have an empty constructor. Which means the analyzer will
fail on 'not_enough_positional_arguments_test/none'.
Is that correct?

I think the '../none' cases should *always* be free of errors.

[Søren Gjesse, 2013/08/28 08:11:05]

Done.

   ;
 }
 
 main() {
-  new B(); /// 01: continued
-  foo(b: 1); /// 02: runtime error
+  new A(b: 1);  /// 00: runtime error
+  new B();  /// 01: continued

[ahe, 2013/08/27 17:14:50]

I think you should be able to get rid of all the continued here. This will also
help you ensure the test is accepted by the analyzer.

[Søren Gjesse, 2013/08/28 08:11:05]

Done.

+  new C();  /// 02: continued
+  new D(b: 1);  /// 03: runtime error
+  new E();  /// 04: continued
+  new F();  /// 05: continued
+  foo(b: 1);  /// 06: runtime error
+  bar(b: 1);  /// 07: runtime error
 }