Reenable and adapt long forgotten proxy test.

Reenable and adapt long forgotten proxy test.

R=rossberg
BUG=

Committed: https://crrev.com/7e3772713f2f253a1cb13ce62763a05953373998
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#35020}

[adamk, 2016-03-23 01:37:08]

adamk@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ adamk@chromium.org

[adamk, 2016-03-23 01:37:08]

lgtm stamp just to have more tests (can't say I read every one in detail,
though)

https://codereview.chromium.org/1823973002/diff/1/test/mjsunit/es6/proxies-fu...
File test/mjsunit/es6/proxies-function.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1823973002/diff/1/test/mjsunit/es6/proxies-fu...
test/mjsunit/es6/proxies-function.js:484: // TODO(rossberg): Ultimately, I want
to have the following test function
Is it still worth leaving this one in (or, maybe, why is it commented out)?

[rossberg, 2016-03-23 08:50:11]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1823973002/diff/1/test/mjsunit/es6/proxies-fu...
File test/mjsunit/es6/proxies-function.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1823973002/diff/1/test/mjsunit/es6/proxies-fu...
test/mjsunit/es6/proxies-function.js:484: // TODO(rossberg): Ultimately, I want
to have the following test function
On 2016/03/23 01:37:08, adamk wrote:
> Is it still worth leaving this one in (or, maybe, why is it commented out)?

Because of what the comment said. ;) At the time it uncovered too many
pre-existing bugs unrelated to proxies that it was infeasible to fix them all
immediately. I don't know if that is still the case, it might be worth trying
again, but that should probably be separated from this test file.

Of course, there also is the issue that the test has N^6 runtime...

[neis, 2016-03-23 08:54:58]

The CQ bit was checked by neis@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-03-23 08:55:03]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1823973002/1
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1823973002/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-03-23 09:14:28]

Committed patchset #1 (id:1)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-03-23 09:15:05]

Description was changed from

==========
Reenable and adapt long forgotten proxy test.

R=rossberg
BUG=
==========

to

==========
Reenable and adapt long forgotten proxy test.

R=rossberg
BUG=

Committed: https://crrev.com/7e3772713f2f253a1cb13ce62763a05953373998
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#35020}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-03-23 09:15:07]

Patchset 1 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/7e3772713f2f253a1cb13ce62763a05953373998
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#35020}

[adamk, 2016-03-23 18:26:11]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1823973002/diff/1/test/mjsunit/es6/proxies-fu...
File test/mjsunit/es6/proxies-function.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1823973002/diff/1/test/mjsunit/es6/proxies-fu...
test/mjsunit/es6/proxies-function.js:484: // TODO(rossberg): Ultimately, I want
to have the following test function
On 2016/03/23 08:50:11, rossberg wrote:
> On 2016/03/23 01:37:08, adamk wrote:
> > Is it still worth leaving this one in (or, maybe, why is it commented out)?
> 
> Because of what the comment said. ;) At the time it uncovered too many
> pre-existing bugs unrelated to proxies that it was infeasible to fix them all
> immediately. I don't know if that is still the case, it might be worth trying
> again, but that should probably be separated from this test file.
> 
> Of course, there also is the issue that the test has N^6 runtime...

I read the comment, but since it was a carry-over from the old
already-commented-out-test, I was wondering why it didn't get resurrected in
this patch.