dartk: Static setter/getter should be taken into account when resolving references

[mkustermann]

From tests/language/static_setter_get_test.dart:

class Class {
  static set o(_) {}
  m() => o; /// 01: static type warning
  noSuchMethod(_) => 42;
}

main() {
  Expect.throws(() => new Class().m()); /// 01:
}

/cc @kmillikin & #28263

[lrhn]

This is actually an interesting case that I wasn't aware of :).

The spec says about the identifier expression id:

Let d be the innermost declaration in the enclosing lexical scope whose
name is id or id=. If no such declaration exists in the lexical scope, let d be
the declaration of the inherited member named id if it exists.

That's not really well-defined since there can be both an id and an id= declaration in the same scope, so which one is it? It matters, because it's only a warning if one is static and the other is dynamic, and the program should have a semantics in that case.
Implementations favor the getter over the setter (reasonably, I'd say, but not mandated).

(Another interesting thing is that this looking at declarations includes abstract getters and setters too).

[mraleph]

Fixed in Fasta! Hooray.