Version 5.1.281.19 (cherry-pick)

Version 5.1.281.19 (cherry-pick)

Merged 2e4280f25af492dd5dd4bd57c621c15082b7f28c

[es7] Fix "implement exponentiation operator proposal" for AIX.

R=hablich@chromium.org
BUG=v8:4948

[MTBrandyberry, 2016-04-26 16:35:50]

Description was changed from

==========
Version 5.1.281.19 (cherry-pick)

Merged 2e4280f25af492dd5dd4bd57c621c15082b7f28c

[es7] Fix "implement exponentiation operator proposal" for AIX.

R=hablich@chromium.org
BUG=v8:4948
==========

to

==========
Version 5.1.281.19 (cherry-pick)

Merged 2e4280f25af492dd5dd4bd57c621c15082b7f28c

[es7] Fix "implement exponentiation operator proposal" for AIX.

R=hablich@chromium.org
BUG=v8:4948
==========

[MTBrandyberry, 2016-04-26 16:35:50]

mbrandy@us.ibm.com changed reviewers:
+ adamk@chromium.org

[MTBrandyberry, 2016-04-27 21:03:56]

On 2016/04/26 16:32:49, MTBrandyberry wrote:

Bump.

[adamk, 2016-04-27 21:06:31]

On 2016/04/27 21:03:56, MTBrandyberry wrote:
> On 2016/04/26 16:32:49, MTBrandyberry wrote:
> 
> Bump.

Why does this need to be merged to 5.1? The exponentiation operator isn't
enabled on that branch.

[michael_dawson, 2016-04-27 21:16:17]

On 2016/04/27 21:06:31, adamk wrote:
> On 2016/04/27 21:03:56, MTBrandyberry wrote:
> > On 2016/04/26 16:32:49, MTBrandyberry wrote:
> > 
> > Bump.
> 
> Why does this need to be merged to 5.1? The exponentiation operator isn't
> enabled on that branch.

The tests are run regularly on the native platforms both in our IBM CI's and it
the community Node.js CI (see here:
https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-v8-linux/).  

Even if the feature is not enabled,  failures in the tests still mean that the
CI shows a problem that needs to be investigated and simply leaving failing
tests results in non-green CI.  If its not fixed in the google repo, this means
that we now have to fix it in 2 different places (our CI runs to work around,
and the tree checked into Node.js) and that anybody else who pulls the "stable"
or "beta" and builds/tests will also potentially ask about test failures.

Therefore, we'd like the stable and beta to be "clean".

[adamk, 2016-04-27 21:19:43]

On 2016/04/27 21:16:17, michael_dawson wrote:
> On 2016/04/27 21:06:31, adamk wrote:
> > On 2016/04/27 21:03:56, MTBrandyberry wrote:
> > > On 2016/04/26 16:32:49, MTBrandyberry wrote:
> > > 
> > > Bump.
> > 
> > Why does this need to be merged to 5.1? The exponentiation operator isn't
> > enabled on that branch.
> 
> The tests are run regularly on the native platforms both in our IBM CI's and
it
> the community Node.js CI (see here:
> https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-v8-linux/).  
> 
> Even if the feature is not enabled,  failures in the tests still mean that the
> CI shows a problem that needs to be investigated and simply leaving failing
> tests results in non-green CI.  If its not fixed in the google repo, this
means
> that we now have to fix it in 2 different places (our CI runs to work around,
> and the tree checked into Node.js) and that anybody else who pulls the
"stable"
> or "beta" and builds/tests will also potentially ask about test failures.
> 
> Therefore, we'd like the stable and beta to be "clean".

Thanks for the explanation; I'm going to defer to hablich@ on this, just because
I'm less aware of how we're handling merges like this.

[Michael Hablich, 2016-04-28 09:46:36]

Why are the tests even run if the feature is not ready? V8 uses *.status files
in order to SKIP depending on the platform. This should also work in this
particular case, right? In the future I think it is a better idea to fix the
downstream CI system.

lgtm

[MTBrandyberry, 2016-04-28 13:43:57]

On 2016/04/28 09:46:36, Hablich wrote:
> Why are the tests even run if the feature is not ready? V8 uses *.status files
> in order to SKIP depending on the platform. This should also work in this
> particular case, right? In the future I think it is a better idea to fix the
> downstream CI system.
> 
> lgtm

Thanks.  It's not always clear (to me anyway) what features are supported for a
given release.

[MTBrandyberry, 2016-04-28 13:45:53]

The CQ bit was checked by mbrandy@us.ibm.com

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-04-28 13:46:01]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1918693004/1
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1918693004/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-04-28 13:46:03]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-04-28 13:46:07]

CLs for remote refs other than refs/pending/heads/master must contain NOTRY=true
and NOPRESUBMIT=true in order for the CQ to process them

[MTBrandyberry, 2016-04-28 14:04:28]

On 2016/04/28 13:46:07, commit-bot: I haz the power wrote:
> CLs for remote refs other than refs/pending/heads/master must contain
NOTRY=true
> and NOPRESUBMIT=true in order for the CQ to process them

Closing and resubmitting since .18 is no longer the HEAD.