[strong] Introduce --use-strong flag

[strong] Introduce --use-strong flag

R=marja@chromium.org
BUG=

Committed: https://crrev.com/5cd84502bf1aadd42b3ccc90746f8bd79402d3b3
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#26556}

[marja, 2015-02-10 17:14:00]

https://codereview.chromium.org/907403002/diff/1/src/compiler.cc
File src/compiler.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/907403002/diff/1/src/compiler.cc#newcode1363
src/compiler.cc:1363: construct_language_mode(FLAG_use_strict, FLAG_use_strong);
This doesn't do the right thing; it doesn't force the "strong is also strict"
restriction; it should only be used for reconstructing valid language modes
which have been stored in a bitwise representation somewhere else.

[rossberg, 2015-02-10 17:19:25]

https://codereview.chromium.org/907403002/diff/1/src/compiler.cc
File src/compiler.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/907403002/diff/1/src/compiler.cc#newcode1363
src/compiler.cc:1363: construct_language_mode(FLAG_use_strict, FLAG_use_strong);
On 2015/02/10 17:14:00, marja wrote:
> This doesn't do the right thing; it doesn't force the "strong is also strict"
> restriction; it should only be used for reconstructing valid language modes
> which have been stored in a bitwise representation somewhere else.

Ah, right, there should be an implication on those flags. Done.

[marja, 2015-02-10 17:22:26]

lgtm

[rossberg, 2015-02-10 17:24:05]

The CQ bit was checked by rossberg@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-10 17:24:43]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/907403002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-10 19:12:58]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-10 19:13:14]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/5cd84502bf1aadd42b3ccc90746f8bd79402d3b3
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#26556}