+1
PS. After few more changesets are done, perhaps we should perhaps have
"negative es6" tests. i.e., attempt es6 constructs in default es5 mode
and expect syntax errors.
-Sundar
On 9/1/2015 8:35 PM, Andreas Woess wrote:
Bikeshedding is welcomed :) I've uploaded a new webrev[1] with
s/BINARY_LITERAL/BINARY_NUMBER/ and an es6 flag in Lexer as suggested
by Sundar.
[1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aw/8134873/webrev.01/
Thanks,
Andreas
On 01/09/15 16:42, Attila Szegedi wrote:
- How about we use BINARY_NUMBER instead of BINARY_LITERAL? I know
this is bikeshedding… It’s still more consisent with other literal
token types (e.g. NULL and STRING) that don’t have the _LITERAL
suffix. If we made it consistent the other way round, we’d have to
have NULL_LITERAL, STRING_LITERAL, etc. Of course, we can just choose
to live with the inconsistency and leave it as it is.
- These literals should only be recognized with --language=es6,
shouldn’t they? In the current form, it seems like the code will
recognize them with es5 language too, won’t it?
Attila.
On Sep 1, 2015, at 4:30 PM, Andreas Woess <andreas.wo...@oracle.com>
wrote:
Please reviewhttp://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aw/8134873/
forhttps://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8134873
Implements Lexer/Parser support for ECMAScript 6 binary (0b) and
octal (0o) literals. I've renamed OCTAL (legacy octal literal, e.g.
0777) to OCTAL_LEGACY and added OCTAL and BINARY_LITERAL token types
(the _LITERAL suffix is to disambiguate with TokenKind.BINARY).
Thanks,
Andreas
