The runtime semantics of this statement are host-defined and therefore
untestable, but the statement's affect on the formal grammar should be
consistent across all implementations.
V8 ran into an issue where the YAML parser our test setup is using
didn't understand the newline, and failed to parser the negative
test expectation below, causing the test to fail. This patch fixes
the issue.
Assert that ImportDeclaration and ExportDeclaration match only the
ModuleItem symbol.
According to the definition of HostResolveImportedModule, it is
acceptable for an implementation to throw a SyntaxError in the event
that a requested module can neither be found nor created:
> If a Module Record corresponding to the pair referencingModule,
> specifier does not exist or cannot be created, an exception must be
> thrown.
In order to reliably detect a SyntaxError in response to the correct
interpretation of the grammar (and not a SyntaxError from an *incorrect*
interpretation of the grammar followed by a failure to resolve the
requested module), the ModuleSpecifier of ExportDeclarations should
describe a valid resource.
- Prefix file names to explicitly describe the "head" position
- Remove statement name suffix as this information is reflected by each
file's location within the file hierarchy
The harness file `Test262Error.js` has not contained executable code since it
was introduced in this project [1]. The definition of the `Test262Error`
function has consistently been located in the `sta.js` harness file which test
runners are expected to inject into the test environment.
Remove the file and all references to it.
[1] See commit c33bf0e0439e6f6bf084c1524d7df8d2b41c515d
Test262 defines tests for expression-producing syntactic forms within
the `language/expressions/` directory. Most tests for object literals
conform to this structure, but 12 such tests were added to the
`language/object-literal/` directory. Move these tests to the canonical
location for object literals.
ECMAScript 2015 introduced tail call optimization for function calls
occuring in a number of positions in the grammar. Assert expected
behavior by triggering a large (but configurable) number of recursive
function calls in these positions. Compliant runtimes will execute such
programs without error; non-compliant runtimes are expected to fail
these tests by throwing an error or crashing when system resources are
exhausted.
The ES2016 draft further refines the completion values for `if` and
`with` statements. Two tests must be removed outright because the
completion value in those cases is no longer accessible from the
runtime.
In order to facilitate proper tail calls, ES2015 modified the completion
value of a number of statements.
These tests use `eval` to verify the new values.
Although the `for..in` statement allows Expressions to define the
iterator, only an AssignmentExpression may occupy this position in the
`for..of` statement.
