Index: test/mjsunit/harmony/symbols.js |
diff --git a/test/mjsunit/harmony/symbols.js b/test/mjsunit/harmony/symbols.js |
index 3fcd06dfdca985fcd81abd8630cb8ededa8fe0d7..06bef4738f608a1d93f7fb91d0a7cd5251afbf41 100644 |
--- a/test/mjsunit/harmony/symbols.js |
+++ b/test/mjsunit/harmony/symbols.js |
@@ -30,22 +30,19 @@ |
var symbols = [] |
+ |
// Test different forms of constructor calls, all equivalent. |
function TestNew() { |
- function IndirectSymbol() { return new Symbol } |
- function indirect() { return new IndirectSymbol() } |
+ function IndirectSymbol() { return Symbol() } |
+ function indirect() { return IndirectSymbol() } |
for (var i = 0; i < 2; ++i) { |
for (var j = 0; j < 5; ++j) { |
symbols.push(Symbol()) |
symbols.push(Symbol(undefined)) |
symbols.push(Symbol("66")) |
symbols.push(Symbol(66)) |
- symbols.push(Symbol(Symbol())) |
- symbols.push((new Symbol).valueOf()) |
- symbols.push((new Symbol()).valueOf()) |
- symbols.push((new Symbol(Symbol())).valueOf()) |
symbols.push(Object(Symbol()).valueOf()) |
- symbols.push((indirect()).valueOf()) |
+ symbols.push((indirect())) |
} |
%OptimizeFunctionOnNextCall(indirect) |
indirect() // Call once before GC throws away type feedback. |
@@ -55,13 +52,18 @@ function TestNew() { |
TestNew() |
+function TestRepeatedApplication() { |
+ assertThrows(function () { Symbol(Symbol()); }, TypeError) |
+} |
+TestRepeatedApplication() |
+ |
+ |
function TestType() { |
for (var i in symbols) { |
assertEquals("symbol", typeof symbols[i]) |
assertTrue(typeof symbols[i] === "symbol") |
assertFalse(%SymbolIsPrivate(symbols[i])) |
assertEquals(null, %_ClassOf(symbols[i])) |
- assertEquals("Symbol", %_ClassOf(new Symbol(symbols[i]))) |
assertEquals("Symbol", %_ClassOf(Object(symbols[i]))) |
} |
} |
@@ -69,13 +71,15 @@ TestType() |
function TestPrototype() { |
+ var symbolPrototype = Object.getPrototypeOf(Object(Symbol())) |
+ assertSame(Function.prototype, Symbol.prototype) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
That seems wrong. Symbol.prototype is an ordinary
sof
2014/01/08 18:13:43
https://people.mozilla.org/~jorendorff/es6-draft.h
arv (Not doing code reviews)
2014/01/08 18:54:44
It says that "The value of the [[Prototype]] inter
rossberg
2014/01/09 10:35:53
Don't confuse .prototype and .[[Prototype]] (a.k.a
sof
2014/01/09 13:17:13
I made that only available on the "SymbolWrapper"
|
assertSame(Object.prototype, Symbol.prototype.__proto__) |
assertSame(Symbol.prototype, Symbol().__proto__) |
- assertSame(Symbol.prototype, Symbol(Symbol()).__proto__) |
- assertSame(Symbol.prototype, (new Symbol).__proto__) |
- assertSame(Symbol.prototype, (new Symbol()).__proto__) |
- assertSame(Symbol.prototype, (new Symbol(Symbol())).__proto__) |
- assertSame(Symbol.prototype, Object(Symbol()).__proto__) |
+ assertSame(symbolPrototype, Object(Symbol()).__proto__) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
Is this different from Symbol.prototype? Why?
sof
2014/01/08 18:13:43
Yes, Object(Symbol()).__proto__ is the prototype o
arv (Not doing code reviews)
2014/01/08 18:54:44
The [[Prototype]] of a symbol wrapper should be Sy
|
+ assertSame(Symbol.prototype, Symbol.__proto__) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
Shouldn't Symbol.__proto__ be Function.prototype?
|
+ // FIXME: what should __proto__ be for a Symbol value? |
+ assertSame(Function.prototype, (Symbol()).__proto__) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
And Symbol().__proto__ should be Symbol.prototype
sof
2014/01/08 18:13:43
Definitely not.
arv (Not doing code reviews)
2014/01/08 18:54:44
When you do a [[Get]] on a non object a temporary
rossberg
2014/01/09 10:35:53
See above.
|
+ assertTrue(typeof ((Symbol()).prototype) === "undefined") |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
Not sure why this test is necessary.
sof
2014/01/08 18:13:43
Just testing that typeof over this .prototype is b
rossberg
2014/01/09 10:35:53
Well, it just tests that the symbol wrapper object
|
for (var i in symbols) { |
assertSame(Symbol.prototype, symbols[i].__proto__) |
} |
@@ -86,36 +90,39 @@ TestPrototype() |
function TestConstructor() { |
assertFalse(Object === Symbol.prototype.constructor) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
This should be true now.
sof
2014/01/08 18:13:43
No, I believe this is correct.
arv (Not doing code reviews)
2014/01/08 18:54:44
Looks correct to me too:
assertSame(Symbol.protot
rossberg
2014/01/09 10:35:53
Oops, you are both right, sorry.
|
assertFalse(Symbol === Object.prototype.constructor) |
- assertSame(Symbol, Symbol.prototype.constructor) |
- assertSame(Symbol, Symbol().__proto__.constructor) |
- assertSame(Symbol, Symbol(Symbol()).__proto__.constructor) |
- assertSame(Symbol, (new Symbol).__proto__.constructor) |
- assertSame(Symbol, (new Symbol()).__proto__.constructor) |
- assertSame(Symbol, (new Symbol(Symbol())).__proto__.constructor) |
+ assertSame(Function, Symbol.prototype.constructor) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
This should be Object, not Function
sof
2014/01/08 18:13:43
Same; are we reading the same draft version of the
arv (Not doing code reviews)
2014/01/08 18:54:44
This should be
assertSame(Symbol.prototype.constr
rossberg
2014/01/09 10:35:53
Arv is correct.
|
+ assertSame(Function, Symbol().__proto__.constructor) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
Dito
arv (Not doing code reviews)
2014/01/08 18:54:44
Should be
assertSame(Symbol, Symbol().__proto__.c
|
+ assertSame(Function, Object(Symbol()).valueOf().__proto__.constructor) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
Dito here. And why the redundant valueOf()?
|
+ assertSame(Function, (Symbol).__proto__.constructor) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
This is an unrelated test, since it tests the cons
|
+ assertSame(Function, (Symbol()).__proto__.constructor) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
This is repeating line 94
|
+ assertSame(Symbol, (Object(Symbol())).__proto__.constructor) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
Nit: redundant parens (here and above)
|
assertSame(Symbol, Object(Symbol()).__proto__.constructor) |
for (var i in symbols) { |
- assertSame(Symbol, symbols[i].__proto__.constructor) |
+ assertSame(Function, symbols[i].__proto__.constructor) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
Should also be Symbol
|
} |
} |
TestConstructor() |
-function TestName() { |
+function TestValueOf() { |
for (var i in symbols) { |
- var name = symbols[i].name |
- assertTrue(name === undefined || name === "66") |
+ var value = Object(symbols[i]).valueOf() |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
Why the redundant Object()?
|
+ assertTrue(value === symbols[i]) |
} |
} |
-TestName() |
+TestValueOf() |
function TestToString() { |
for (var i in symbols) { |
+ var stringified; |
+ assertDoesNotThrow(function () { stringified = String(Object(symbols[i])); }) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
Nit: line length (just remove the space after 'fun
|
+ assertTrue(stringified == "Symbol(66)" || stringified == "Symbol()") |
assertThrows(function() { String(symbols[i]) }, TypeError) |
assertThrows(function() { symbols[i] + "" }, TypeError) |
assertThrows(function() { symbols[i].toString() }, TypeError) |
- assertThrows(function() { (new Symbol(symbols[i])).toString() }, TypeError) |
- assertThrows(function() { Object(symbols[i]).toString() }, TypeError) |
+ assertThrows(function() { (Symbol(symbols[i])).toString() }, TypeError) |
+ assertDoesNotThrow(function() { Object(symbols[i]).toString() }) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
Why not check the expected result?
|
assertEquals("[object Symbol]", Object.prototype.toString.call(symbols[i])) |
} |
} |
@@ -156,10 +163,17 @@ function TestEquality() { |
assertTrue(Object.is(symbols[i], symbols[i])) |
assertTrue(symbols[i] === symbols[i]) |
assertTrue(symbols[i] == symbols[i]) |
- assertFalse(symbols[i] === new Symbol(symbols[i])) |
- assertFalse(new Symbol(symbols[i]) === symbols[i]) |
- assertTrue(symbols[i] == new Symbol(symbols[i])) |
- assertTrue(new Symbol(symbols[i]) == symbols[i]) |
+ assertTrue(symbols[i] === Object(symbols[i]).valueOf()) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
The original test was to ensure that symbols are d
|
+ assertTrue(Object(symbols[i]).valueOf() === symbols[i]) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
Likewise
|
+ assertTrue(symbols[i] == Object(symbols[i]).valueOf()) |
+ assertTrue(Object(symbols[i]).valueOf() == symbols[i]) |
+ assertEquals(Object(symbols[i]), Object(symbols[i])) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
This is surprising. Why are the two objects equal?
|
+ assertEquals(Object(symbols[i]).valueOf(), Object(symbols[i]).valueOf()) |
+ // Comparing Symbol wrappers via equality should be done without |
+ // invoking ToPrimitive() (which throws for Symbol wrappers.) |
+ var sym1 = Object(symbols[i]) |
+ assertFalse(sym1 == Object(symbols[i])) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
That seems to contradict line 170 -- I'm really co
|
+ assertTrue(sym1 == sym1) |
} |
// All symbols should be distinct. |
@@ -188,7 +202,7 @@ TestEquality() |
function TestGet() { |
for (var i in symbols) { |
assertThrows(function() { symbols[i].toString() }, TypeError) |
- assertEquals(symbols[i], symbols[i].valueOf()) |
+ assertEquals(symbols[i], Object(symbols[i]).valueOf()) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
Why is Object() needed?
sof
2014/01/08 18:13:43
To test that the wrapper object's valueOf() return
rossberg
2014/01/09 10:35:53
But the wrapper is supposed to be created implicit
sof
2014/01/10 10:53:52
Where is that requirement given? Symbol.prototype.
|
assertEquals(undefined, symbols[i].a) |
assertEquals(undefined, symbols[i]["a" + "b"]) |
assertEquals(undefined, symbols[i]["" + "1"]) |
@@ -203,7 +217,7 @@ function TestSet() { |
symbols[i].toString = 0 |
assertThrows(function() { symbols[i].toString() }, TypeError) |
symbols[i].valueOf = 0 |
- assertEquals(symbols[i], symbols[i].valueOf()) |
+ assertEquals(symbols[i], Object(symbols[i]).valueOf()) |
rossberg
2014/01/08 17:52:25
Dito
|
symbols[i].a = 0 |
assertEquals(undefined, symbols[i].a) |
symbols[i]["a" + "b"] = 0 |