A follow up to the previous commit, this rewrites some tests that relied
on the lack of brand checks for certain Temporal.TimeZone methods.
https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/pull/1693 added brand checks to
these methods.
We can no longer use a plain object time zone or even a Proxy with a real
branded Temporal.TimeZone object as its handler to do these tests, so we
instead create an instance of Temporal.TimeZone and define own accessor
properties on it in order to test the observable property accesses that we
need to see according to the spec text.
This requires an improvement to TemporalHelpers.observeProperty() in order
to be able to log property accesses to Symbol-valued properties.
https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/pull/1693 added checks for the
receiver of certain Temporal.Calendar and Temporal.TimeZone methods. Add
branding tests for these methods, similar to the already existing branding
tests.
This was a normative change that achieved consensus at the December 2021
TC39 meeting.
https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/issues/1753 records the
consensus reached at the October 2021 TC39 meeting to disallow "-000000"
as an extended year, both in Date.parse and Temporal. This adds tests for
the Temporal part of that.
This requires a few adjustments of time zone names and offsets in some
places. The only named time zone that is required to be supported by an
implementation not supporting ECMA-402 is "UTC".
In order to test this functionality on hosts that don't have Intl, we have
to use "UTC" and offset-only time zones here, as the full set of IANA time
zone names are not required to be supported across all hosts.
This makes some progress on https://github.com/tc39/test262/issues/3253
Unfortunately, in #3304 I made a last-minute mistake when I added the
uncallable value to the assertion message, and neglected to test it;
Symbols can't be converted to strings like that, so these tests would
fail. This fixes the assertion messages.
Tests for the normative changes made to Temporal in
https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/pull/1829
In a previous version of the specification, there was a fallback to the
intrinsic getOffsetNanosecondsFor when it was undefined.
