[destructuring] Refactor duplicate parameter name detection.

[destructuring] Refactor duplicate parameter name detection.

Pushed the detection logic down to ParseAndClassifyIdentifier in
preparation to having patterns in parameter positions.

R=arv@chromium.org,rossberg@chromium.org,wingo@igalia.com
BUG=v8:811
LOG=N

[Dmitry Lomov (no reviews), 2015-06-09 13:36:54]

PTAL

[Dmitry Lomov (no reviews), 2015-06-09 14:13:40]

The CQ bit was checked by dslomov@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-09 14:14:18]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1170153003/1

[arv (Not doing code reviews), 2015-06-09 14:17:47]

LGTM

https://codereview.chromium.org/1170153003/diff/1/src/preparser.h
File src/preparser.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1170153003/diff/1/src/preparser.h#newcode1593
src/preparser.h:1593: void DeclareFormalParameter(void* scope,
PreParserIdentifier param,
FormalParameterScope scope

[Dmitry Lomov (no reviews), 2015-06-09 14:38:30]

Please take another look

https://codereview.chromium.org/1170153003/diff/1/src/preparser.h
File src/preparser.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1170153003/diff/1/src/preparser.h#newcode1593
src/preparser.h:1593: void DeclareFormalParameter(void* scope,
PreParserIdentifier param,
On 2015/06/09 14:17:47, arv wrote:
> FormalParameterScope scope

I did one better and removed that trait completely. It is now just Scope*.

[wingo, 2015-06-09 14:53:08]

Question below.  LGTM in either case.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1170153003/diff/20001/src/preparser.h
File src/preparser.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1170153003/diff/20001/src/preparser.h#newcode...
src/preparser.h:1961: }
Do we actually want to detect formal parameter errors at all in the preparser,
given our recent discussions?

[Dmitry Lomov (no reviews), 2015-06-09 14:56:12]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1170153003/diff/20001/src/preparser.h
File src/preparser.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1170153003/diff/20001/src/preparser.h#newcode...
src/preparser.h:1961: }
On 2015/06/09 14:53:08, wingo wrote:
> Do we actually want to detect formal parameter errors at all in the preparser,
> given our recent discussions?

Good question. I am shooting for "no functionality regressions" in this CL, but
overall maybe it has to go.

[Dmitry Lomov (no reviews), 2015-06-09 16:15:27]

The CQ bit was checked by dslomov@chromium.org

[Dmitry Lomov (no reviews), 2015-06-09 16:15:27]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from arv@chromium.org,
wingo@igalia.com
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1170153003/#ps40001
(title: "Rebased")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-09 16:15:51]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1170153003/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-09 17:14:11]

Committed patchset #3 (id:40001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-09 17:14:37]

Patchset 3 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/b64e13b0d846daf57bc200dc4559e834f9cb2a91
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28876}