Remove the 'caller' property from the strict-mode arguments map

test/mjsunit/es6/classes.js

Index: test/mjsunit/es6/classes.js
diff --git a/test/mjsunit/es6/classes.js b/test/mjsunit/es6/classes.js
index fb77dbb8e4b01bb273512b215763dadbb1077661..64cdb59574d98bc9fa5bc3c013e34ff79d7ac14b 100644
--- a/test/mjsunit/es6/classes.js
+++ b/test/mjsunit/es6/classes.js
@@ -164,14 +164,21 @@
                SyntaxError);
 
   var D = class extends function() {
-    arguments.caller;

[adamk, 2016/10/31 18:05:36]

Seems reasonable to change this to test arguments.callee, since that still
throws. Or if you want to actually test for the absence of .caller, you could
add an assertThrows() for '() => e.arguments.callee'.

+    this.arguments = arguments;
   } {};
   assertThrows(function() {
     Object.getPrototypeOf(D).arguments;
   }, TypeError);
-  assertThrows(function() {
-    new D;
-  }, TypeError);
+  var e = new D();
+  assertEquals(undefined, Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(e.arguments, "caller"));

[adamk, 2016/10/31 18:05:36]

Nit: wrap to 80 columns.

+  assertEquals(undefined, e.arguments.caller);
+  assertEquals(true, Reflect.set(e.arguments, "caller", 0));

[adamk, 2016/10/31 18:05:36]

I don't understand the need for this test. You're already asserting above that
there's no own "caller" property. I don't think this or the below are
interesting here.

[caitp, 2016/10/31 18:07:49]

I suggested adding this, because property access is complicated, and I'd like to
have many paths tested (even though this is still a small subset). Similar to
test262's tendency to do this.

[caitp, 2016/10/31 18:10:33]

specifically, this also checks that the property is also not installed on the
arguments object's prototype, and if it is, not in a configurable way. I suppose
`assertFalse('caller' in arguments)` would be okay too, though (but still fewer
paths taken)

[adamk, 2016/10/31 18:29:15]

I just don't think it makes sense to test property access semantics in a test
that's fundamentally about the absence of this property. I'm OK with
assertFalse('caller' in arguments), but anything more than that feels like we're
putting the test in the wrong place.

+  assertEquals(Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(e.arguments, "caller"), {
+    value: 0,
+    configurable: true,
+    enumerable: true,
+    writable: true
+  });
 })();