Reland of [es6] ship regexp sticky flag.

Reland of [es6] ship regexp sticky flag. (patchset #1 id:1 of https://codereview.chromium.org/1531043002/ )

Reason for revert:
This can be relanded since the web compatibility fix in https://codereview.chromium.org/1543723002 has been submitted.

Original issue's description:
> Revert of [es6] ship regexp sticky flag. (patchset #2 id:20001 of https://codereview.chromium.org/1509733010/ )
> 
> Reason for revert:
> This causes compatibility issues, as documented in https://bugs.chromium.org/p/v8/issues/detail?id=4617#c9
> 
> Original issue's description:
> > [es6] ship regexp sticky flag.
> > 
> > R=littledan@chromium.org
> > BUG=v8:4342
> > LOG=Y
> > 
> > Committed: https://crrev.com/86c2dd4042dc9ce293e004234eb094f2b51d9640
> > Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#32826}
> 
> TBR=yangguo@chromium.org
> NOPRESUBMIT=true
> NOTREECHECKS=true
> NOTRY=true
> BUG=v8:4342
TBR=yangguo@chromium.org
NOPRESUBMIT=true
NOTREECHECKS=true
NOTRY=true
BUG=v8:4342

[Dan Ehrenberg, 2015-12-22 06:38:03]

Created Reland of [es6] ship regexp sticky flag.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-22 06:38:13]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1540263004/1
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1540263004/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-22 06:38:58]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-12-22 06:38:58]

Failed to apply patch for src/flag-definitions.h:
While running git apply --index -3 -p1;
  error: patch failed: src/flag-definitions.h:214
  Falling back to three-way merge...
  Applied patch to 'src/flag-definitions.h' with conflicts.
  U src/flag-definitions.h

Patch:       src/flag-definitions.h
Index: src/flag-definitions.h
diff --git a/src/flag-definitions.h b/src/flag-definitions.h
index
6ccf180f6a860ccf09d7f0278ca89be034f4d8b0..9bbad4a42988d9e354f786507f947ea5af47037c
100644
--- a/src/flag-definitions.h
+++ b/src/flag-definitions.h
@@ -214,18 +214,18 @@
 
 // Features that are complete (but still behind --harmony/es-staging flag).
 #define HARMONY_STAGED(V)                                     \
-  V(harmony_regexps, "harmony regular expression extensions") \
   V(harmony_sloppy, "harmony features in sloppy mode")        \
   V(harmony_sloppy_let, "harmony let in sloppy mode")
 
 // Features that are shipping (turned on by default, but internal flag
remains).
-#define HARMONY_SHIPPING(V)                                     \
-  V(harmony_default_parameters, "harmony default parameters")   \
-  V(harmony_destructuring_bind, "harmony destructuring bind")   \
-  V(harmony_concat_spreadable, "harmony isConcatSpreadable")    \
-  V(harmony_tolength, "harmony ToLength")                       \
-  V(harmony_tostring, "harmony toString")                       \
-  V(harmony_completion, "harmony completion value semantics")
+#define HARMONY_SHIPPING(V)                                   \
+  V(harmony_default_parameters, "harmony default parameters") \
+  V(harmony_destructuring_bind, "harmony destructuring bind") \
+  V(harmony_concat_spreadable, "harmony isConcatSpreadable")  \
+  V(harmony_tolength, "harmony ToLength")                     \
+  V(harmony_tostring, "harmony toString")                     \
+  V(harmony_completion, "harmony completion value semantics") \
+  V(harmony_regexps, "harmony regular expression extensions")
 
 // Once a shipping feature has proved stable in the wild, it will be dropped
 // from HARMONY_SHIPPING, all occurrences of the FLAG_ variable are removed,

[Yang, 2015-12-22 08:21:46]

On 2015/12/22 06:38:58, commit-bot: I haz the power wrote:
> Failed to apply patch for src/flag-definitions.h:
> While running git apply --index -3 -p1;
>   error: patch failed: src/flag-definitions.h:214
>   Falling back to three-way merge...
>   Applied patch to 'src/flag-definitions.h' with conflicts.
>   U src/flag-definitions.h
> 
> Patch:       src/flag-definitions.h
> Index: src/flag-definitions.h
> diff --git a/src/flag-definitions.h b/src/flag-definitions.h
> index
>
6ccf180f6a860ccf09d7f0278ca89be034f4d8b0..9bbad4a42988d9e354f786507f947ea5af47037c
> 100644
> --- a/src/flag-definitions.h
> +++ b/src/flag-definitions.h
> @@ -214,18 +214,18 @@
>  
>  // Features that are complete (but still behind --harmony/es-staging flag).
>  #define HARMONY_STAGED(V)                                     \
> -  V(harmony_regexps, "harmony regular expression extensions") \
>    V(harmony_sloppy, "harmony features in sloppy mode")        \
>    V(harmony_sloppy_let, "harmony let in sloppy mode")
>  
>  // Features that are shipping (turned on by default, but internal flag
> remains).
> -#define HARMONY_SHIPPING(V)                                     \
> -  V(harmony_default_parameters, "harmony default parameters")   \
> -  V(harmony_destructuring_bind, "harmony destructuring bind")   \
> -  V(harmony_concat_spreadable, "harmony isConcatSpreadable")    \
> -  V(harmony_tolength, "harmony ToLength")                       \
> -  V(harmony_tostring, "harmony toString")                       \
> -  V(harmony_completion, "harmony completion value semantics")
> +#define HARMONY_SHIPPING(V)                                   \
> +  V(harmony_default_parameters, "harmony default parameters") \
> +  V(harmony_destructuring_bind, "harmony destructuring bind") \
> +  V(harmony_concat_spreadable, "harmony isConcatSpreadable")  \
> +  V(harmony_tolength, "harmony ToLength")                     \
> +  V(harmony_tostring, "harmony toString")                     \
> +  V(harmony_completion, "harmony completion value semantics") \
> +  V(harmony_regexps, "harmony regular expression extensions")
>  
>  // Once a shipping feature has proved stable in the wild, it will be dropped
>  // from HARMONY_SHIPPING, all occurrences of the FLAG_ variable are removed,

lgtm.

[Michael Hablich, 2015-12-22 08:25:13]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1543723002 just got reverted => not lgtm

[Dan Ehrenberg, 2015-12-22 08:28:49]

On 2015/12/22 at 08:25:13, hablich wrote:
> https://codereview.chromium.org/1543723002 just got reverted => not lgtm

I think we can go ahead with this patch once
https://codereview.chromium.org/1545633002 goes through. Or do you think
otherwise, hablich@?

[Dan Ehrenberg, 2015-12-22 08:53:46]

On 2015/12/22 at 08:28:49, Dan Ehrenberg wrote:
> On 2015/12/22 at 08:25:13, hablich wrote:
> > https://codereview.chromium.org/1543723002 just got reverted => not lgtm
> 
> I think we can go ahead with this patch once
https://codereview.chromium.org/1545633002 goes through. Or do you think
otherwise, hablich@?

This has a merge conflict and is subsumed by
https://codereview.chromium.org/1546563002