chore(rome_js_syntax): Delete the unused JsConstructorParameter kind

[MichaReiser]

Summary

This PR deletes the unused JsSyntaxKind::JS_CONSTRUCTOR_PARAMETER.

Test Plan

cargo build

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for rometools ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	cf46bbb
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/rometools/deploys/63231173a8dead0009d15406
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-3228--rometools.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings.

[github-actions]

Parser conformance results on ubuntu-latest

js/262

Test result	main count	This PR count	Difference
Total	45879	45879	0
Passed	44939	44939	0
Failed	940	940	0
Panics	0	0	0
Coverage	97.95%	97.95%	0.00%

jsx/babel

Test result	main count	This PR count	Difference
Total	39	39	0
Passed	36	36	0
Failed	3	3	0
Panics	0	0	0
Coverage	92.31%	92.31%	0.00%

symbols/microsoft

Test result	main count	This PR count	Difference
Total	5946	5946	0
Passed	1621	1621	0
Failed	4325	4325	0
Panics	0	0	0
Coverage	27.26%	27.26%	0.00%

ts/babel

Test result	main count	This PR count	Difference
Total	588	588	0
Passed	519	519	0
Failed	69	69	0
Panics	0	0	0
Coverage	88.27%	88.27%	0.00%

ts/microsoft

Test result	main count	This PR count	Difference
Total	16257	16257	0
Passed	12395	12395	0
Failed	3862	3862	0
Panics	0	0	0
Coverage	76.24%	76.24%	0.00%

[github-actions]

Playground for commit 7c2634a

[ematipico]

I wonder if there's a way to generate these kinds from the grammar.. or make sure there aren't dangling keywords like in this example.

[MichaReiser]

I wonder if there's a way to generate these kinds from the grammar.. or make sure there aren't dangling keywords like in this example.

Yes, that would be a nice improvement. @IWANABETHATGUY would this be something you have an interest in?

[IWANABETHATGUY]

Yeah, let us open an issue to track this task.

[IWANABETHATGUY]

Could we guarantee that all the node in KIND_SRC.nodes are defined in xx.ungram ?
More specifically, SET(KIND_SRC.nodes) == SET(xx.ungram.definition) ?

[MichaReiser]

KIND_SRC

I'm not entirely sure what you're saying. What I understand is if it is guaranteed that all nodes are defined in the .ungram file and there are no other nodes (or tokens).

I think this is safe to assume because any node that isn't defined in the ungram file won't have a corresponding AST node.

[IWANABETHATGUY]

defined

I mean if some node_kind defined in KIND_SRC.nodes

tools/xtask/codegen/src/kinds_src.rs

Line 187 in 5654fae

nodes: &[

but not in xx.ungram file, vice versa, it will not be safe to apply your advice the generating code would be broken.

[IWANABETHATGUY]

sorry for my poor expression.