Proposed patch for review (JCTree.Tag)

[Kumar Srinivasan]

Vicente,

Thank you for making these changes.

One more nit, while I was looking at your changes for some other reason,
it struck me that  the correct usage  would be  "have()" and "haveNot()" 
vs. "has()"
and "hasNot()".

Thanks
Kumar


> Thank you all for your insightful comments!
>
> Vicente
>
>
>
> --- El *mié, 2/11/11, Kumar Srinivasan 
> /<kumar.x.srinivasan at oracle.com>/* escribió:
>
>
>     De: Kumar Srinivasan <kumar.x.srinivasan at oracle.com>
>     Asunto: Re: Proposed patch for review (JCTree.Tag)
>     Para: compiler-dev at openjdk.java.net
>     Fecha: miércoles, 2 de noviembre, 2011 21:49
>
>     Nice work
>
>     2 cents,  but is it worthwhile to add a hasNotTag(ASSIGN) or
>     noTag(ASSIGN) convenience method ?
>     this will eliminate a few negative checks, ex:
>
>     Annotate.java.
>     -if (args.length() == 1 && !args.head.hasTag(ASSIGN)) {
>     +if (args.length() == 1 && args.head.hasNotTag(ASSIGN)) {
>
>     Kumar
>
>     > I have posted an updated patch from Vicente, available here:
>     >
>     > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jjg/6921494/webrev.01/
>     <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ejjg/6921494/webrev.01/>
>     >
>     > -- Jon
>     >
>     > On 10/24/2011 02:39 AM, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote:
>     >> On 24/10/11 06:25, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>     >>> I've posted a patch from our newest contributor, Vicente Zaldivar.
>     >>> The patch is a cleanup to the JCTree.tag values, to use enums
>     >>> instead of small integers.
>     >>>
>     >>> You can see the patch here:
>     >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jjg/6921494/webrev.00/
>     <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ejjg/6921494/webrev.00/>
>     >>>
>     >>> Thanks to Vicente for the contribution. Review feedback here or
>     >>> to Vicente, please.
>     >>>
>     >>> -- Jon
>     >> Great work - couple of comments below:
>     >>
>     >> *) JCTree - I would add an import static as follows:
>     >>
>     >> import static com.sun.tools.javac.tree.JCTree.Tag.*
>     >>
>     >> This way you will get rid of all the qualified identifier (i.e.
>     most
>     >> of the code in JCTree should go back to its original form).
>     >>
>     >> The same applies to all files (I listed the files where there
>     is at
>     >> least more than a single qualified ident):
>     >>
>     >> -) Annotate.java
>     >> -) Attr.java
>     >> -) Check.java
>     >> -) Flow.java
>     >> -) Lower.java
>     >> -) MemberEnter.java
>     >> -) Resolve.java (a non-static import of JCTree.Tag would do fine)
>     >> -) Gen.java
>     >> -) JavacElements.java
>     >> -) JavacParser.java
>     >> -) Pretty.java
>     >> -) TreeInfo.java
>     >> -) TreeMaker.java (a non-static import of JCTree.Tag would do fine)
>     >> -) ClassDocImpl.java
>     >>
>     >> Maurizio
>     >
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/compiler-dev/attachments/20111104/df07c84a/attachment.html