-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 413
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[Merged by Bors] - Initialize var
bindings in runtime environments with undefined
#2860
Conversation
Test262 conformance changes
Fixed tests (22):
Broken tests (48):
|
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2860 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 50.95% 50.98% +0.02%
==========================================
Files 419 419
Lines 41940 41963 +23
==========================================
+ Hits 21372 21393 +21
- Misses 20568 20570 +2
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. |
I'm pretty sure we currently don't have support for that part of the annex, which probably means that the regressed tests were false positives, right? If that's the case, I think we can merge this with no problems. |
Yeah, sort of. Im currently at +235 -291 with all broken tests annexB and some more "normal" tests fixed. I'm currently trying to make the annexB stuff work at least partially. |
There are a couple of refactors and a bit of aligning with the spec before we can fix the annexB tests. So I think @jedel1043 is right, let's go ahead and ship this change to fix the bugs. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me!
d9fd074
to
435252b
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Great work!
After this, do we need the hoistable re-ordering of nodes? |
Probably not. We can try to remove that after we merge this and see if anything breaks. |
We still need it, but I am working on refactoring the relevant parts of the compiler so that they work more like the spec. That refactor should remove the reordering. We also need to remove it to implement the annexB function syntax. |
bors r+ |
…2860) Currently in draft, because it breaks some of the annexB [`Block-Level Function Declarations Web Legacy Compatibility Semantics`](https://tc39.es/ecma262/#sec-block-level-function-declarations-web-legacy-compatibility-semantics) tests. This Pull Request fixes #2795, fixes #2779 and fixes #2760. It changes the following: - Initialize `var` bindings in runtime environments with `undefined` - Add a missing environment at class construction time.
Pull request successfully merged into main. Build succeeded: |
var
bindings in runtime environments with undefined
var
bindings in runtime environments with undefined
Currently in draft, because it breaks some of the annexB
Block-Level Function Declarations Web Legacy Compatibility Semantics
tests.This Pull Request fixes #2795, fixes #2779 and fixes #2760.
It changes the following:
var
bindings in runtime environments withundefined