tyler.durden
/
test262
mirror of https://github.com/tc39/test262.git
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Fix commit messages

This commit is contained in:
Daniel Ehrenberg 2017-04-11 23:58:04 +02:00
parent dbfca4581d
commit 799568fe26
2 changed files with 13 additions and 16 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

17
test/language/statements/async-function/let-newline-await-in-async-function.js
View File

@ -5,19 +5,18 @@
author: Jeff Walden <jwalden+code@mit.edu>
esid: sec-let-and-const-declarations
description: >
`await` must not be considered a permissible binding name in
LexicalDeclaration as used in async functions.
`let await` does not permit ASI in between, as `await` is a BindingIdentifier
info: >
LexicalDeclaration is parametrized to indicate whether `async` is permitted as
binding name. In async functions `await` is excluded from LexicalDeclaration
as a binding name. Therefore ASI *can* apply between `let` (where a
LexicalDeclaration is permitted) and `await`, so a subsequent `0` forms part
of an AwaitExpression and there is no syntax error.
`await` is a perfectly cromulent binding name in any context grammatically, just
prohibited by static semantics in some contexts. Therefore ASI can never apply
between `let` (where a LexicalDeclaration is permitted) and `await`,
so a subsequent `0` where `=` was expected is a syntax error.
negative:
phase: early
type: SyntaxError
---*/
async function f() {
let
await 0;
}
assert(f instanceof Function);

12
test/language/statements/let/syntax/let-newline-await-in-normal-function.js
View File

@ -5,14 +5,12 @@
author: Jeff Walden <jwalden+code@mit.edu>
esid: sec-let-and-const-declarations
description: >
`await` must be considered a permissible binding name in LexicalDeclaration as
used in non-async functions.
`let await` does not permit ASI in between, as `await` is a BindingIdentifier
info: >
LexicalDeclaration is parametrized to indicate whether `async` is permitted as
binding name. In non-async functions `await` is a perfectly cromulent binding
name. Therefore ASI can't apply between `let` (where a LexicalDeclaration is
permitted) and `await`, so a subsequent `0` where `=` was expected is a syntax
error.
`await` is a perfectly cromulent binding name in any context grammatically, just
prohibited by static semantics in some contexts. Therefore ASI can never apply
between `let` (where a LexicalDeclaration is permitted) and `await`,
so a subsequent `0` where `=` was expected is a syntax error.
negative:
phase: early
type: SyntaxError