Add strong mode.

Add strong mode.

It doesn't do anything for now, but it implies strict mode. Added tests to
test-parsing.cc to test that.

BUG=

Committed: https://crrev.com/d21b9a142241ffd9593416d5a04cbea18ed1930e
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#26460}

[marja, 2015-02-04 15:59:13]

marja@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ rossberg@chromium.org

[marja, 2015-02-04 15:59:14]

rossberg, ptal

[arv (Not doing code reviews), 2015-02-04 16:17:11]

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

[arv (Not doing code reviews), 2015-02-04 16:17:12]

It looks like this is going into master without a flag?

https://codereview.chromium.org/898983002/diff/1/src/parser.cc
File src/parser.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/898983002/diff/1/src/parser.cc#newcode1156
src/parser.cc:1156: bool use_sanity_found =
Don't we want a flag for this work?

[rossberg, 2015-02-04 16:18:09]

He he!

https://codereview.chromium.org/898983002/diff/1/src/globals.h
File src/globals.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/898983002/diff/1/src/globals.h#newcode245
src/globals.h:245: inline bool is_sloppy(LanguageMode language_mode) {
Nit: perhaps reorder methods.

https://codereview.chromium.org/898983002/diff/1/src/parser.cc
File src/parser.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/898983002/diff/1/src/parser.cc#newcode1157
src/parser.cc:1157: !use_strict_found && !is_sane(language_mode()) &&
If I read this correctly then

  "use sanity"; "use strict";

will turn on sane mode, while

  "use strict"; "use sanity";

will leave you in strict mode. That would be weird. I think it should be fine to
redundantly have both directives in either order.

https://codereview.chromium.org/898983002/diff/1/test/cctest/test-parsing.cc
File test/cctest/test-parsing.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/898983002/diff/1/test/cctest/test-parsing.cc#...
test/cctest/test-parsing.cc:4998: {NULL, NULL}};
Maybe add a test checking multiple directives.

[marja, 2015-02-04 16:19:40]

Hmm yeah, should probably go behind a flag - the breaking case would be that
websites start using "use sanity" directives and then we add more rules about
what is not allowed. That seems bad. I'll add a flag.

[rossberg, 2015-02-04 16:19:57]

https://codereview.chromium.org/898983002/diff/1/src/parser.cc
File src/parser.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/898983002/diff/1/src/parser.cc#newcode1156
src/parser.cc:1156: bool use_sanity_found =
On 2015/02/04 16:17:11, arv wrote:
> Don't we want a flag for this work?

Ah, excellent point! Yes, we need a flag. I suggest --sane-mode.

[adamk, 2015-02-04 19:22:55]

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

[adamk, 2015-02-04 19:22:55]

Besides a flag, I think we need to decide on a name before we start landing
code.

[marja, 2015-02-05 12:11:38]

Thanks for comments. All done. Now stronger than ever.

https://codereview.chromium.org/898983002/diff/1/src/globals.h
File src/globals.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/898983002/diff/1/src/globals.h#newcode245
src/globals.h:245: inline bool is_sloppy(LanguageMode language_mode) {
On 2015/02/04 16:18:08, rossberg wrote:
> Nit: perhaps reorder methods.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/898983002/diff/1/src/parser.cc
File src/parser.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/898983002/diff/1/src/parser.cc#newcode1156
src/parser.cc:1156: bool use_sanity_found =
On 2015/02/04 16:17:11, arv wrote:
> Don't we want a flag for this work?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/898983002/diff/1/src/parser.cc#newcode1157
src/parser.cc:1157: !use_strict_found && !is_sane(language_mode()) &&
On 2015/02/04 16:18:09, rossberg wrote:
> If I read this correctly then
> 
>   "use sanity"; "use strict";
> 
> will turn on sane mode, while
> 
>   "use strict"; "use sanity";
> 
> will leave you in strict mode. That would be weird. I think it should be fine
to
> redundantly have both directives in either order.

Done. (Oops, preparser was already following that logic.)

https://codereview.chromium.org/898983002/diff/1/test/cctest/test-parsing.cc
File test/cctest/test-parsing.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/898983002/diff/1/test/cctest/test-parsing.cc#...
test/cctest/test-parsing.cc:4998: {NULL, NULL}};
On 2015/02/04 16:18:09, rossberg wrote:
> Maybe add a test checking multiple directives.

Done.

[marja, 2015-02-05 12:12:39]

(Also note that the subject line for this code review didn't change, but the
actual description did. That's what will be in the commit.)

[rossberg, 2015-02-05 14:07:41]

lgtm

[marja, 2015-02-05 14:08:49]

The CQ bit was checked by marja@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-05 14:09:50]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/898983002/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-05 14:11:43]

Committed patchset #3 (id:40001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-05 14:12:01]

Patchset 3 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/d21b9a142241ffd9593416d5a04cbea18ed1930e
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#26460}