Fix for bug #86

[victor-cr]

Fix for bug #86
Tests v8 before fix:

Excluding skipped: 89.5% (3630/4054) passed
Including skipped: 82.7% (3630/4392) passed

After fix:

Excluding skipped: 89.6% (3631/4054) passed
Including skipped: 82.7% (3631/4392) passed

Also, after the change the output equals to the one from v8 node.

[graalvmbot]

Hello Viktor Polishchuk, thanks for contributing a PR to our project!

We use the Oracle Contributor Agreement to make the copyright of contributions clear. We don't have a record of you having signed this yet, based on your email address viktorpo -(at)- wix -(dot)- com. You can sign it at that link.

If you think you've already signed it, please comment below and we'll check.

[victor-cr]

I have already signed OCA with my backup mail: my user name is victor.polischuk

[wirthi]

Hi,

thanks for your contribution. I see you listed as Victor Polischuk - OpenJDK - victor.polischuk. I'll update our CI so it accepts this.

Best, Christian

[iamstolis]

Thank you for an attempt to provide a fix for bug #86. Your patch really ensures that the expression mentioned in the bug does not trigger a SyntaxError. Unfortunately, it also results in other expressions (like Object({a=1})) not to trigger SyntaxError incorrectly.

[graalvmbot]

Viktor Polishchuk has signed the Oracle Contributor Agreement (based on email address viktorpo -(at)- wix -(dot)- com) so can contribute to this repository.

[victor-cr]

Excluding skipped: 89.6% (3631/4054) passed
Including skipped: 82.7% (3631/4392) passed

Also I believe it covers only the case with async arrow functions

[iamstolis]

Thank you for another attempt to fix bug #86. This attempt looks much better than the first one and is very close to a correct fix, I believe. Unfortunately, there are still some corner cases that are not handled correctly. async token can either represent a modifier of an async function or it can be an identifier (of a normal/non-async function possibly). Your fix does not handle the latter case correctly. It accepts expressions that should lead to SyntaxError. For example, async({a=1}) should trigger a SyntaxError but it does not.

In fact, I already have a fix for bug #86 ready for a review in our internal system. The fix handles the mentioned corner case correctly but is very similar to your fix otherwise.

Note that we appreciate external contributions. I am sorry that our efforts clashed on fixing of bug #86. If I knew that you will attempt to fix the issue on your own then I would not start the work on the fix myself.

[victor-cr]

No problem, I was just blocked with the bug. I am glad it is fixed. Thank you.