[explicit-resource-management] Remove invalid using tests within case clauses #4904
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Contributor
|
I uploaded a PR to update the tests previously #4464 and I totally forgot about about. We can close that PR, when this one merges. Thanks for the clean up. |
Contributor
Author
Thanks for the heads-up. Glad to know there is already a PR out there. So this PR is a duplicate of #4464. Since that PR can be merged cleanly, I will close mine. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Per rbuckton/ecma262#14, using declarations are not allowed if they are nested directly within the case clauses.
Since we already have a test on this case (https://github.com/tc39/test262/blob/061c0c3ccea8c6d98fa455370df022c572540c42/test/language/statements/using/syntax/using-invalid-switchstatement-caseclause.js), some tests in the staging folder become in conflict with it, and thus they should be removed. It is likely that they are sourced from an early V8 implementation which did not forbid using within case clause.