LibJS: Replace the verify in private identifier with a syntax error

Since sometimes expressions are parsed without checking we can hit this
expression without it being followed by an 'in'.
This commit is contained in:
davidot 2021-11-27 00:16:01 +01:00 committed by Linus Groh
parent b7c7d54167
commit c2ebaa9d87
Notes: sideshowbarker 2024-07-17 23:17:54 +09:00
2 changed files with 15 additions and 2 deletions

View file

@ -1439,7 +1439,8 @@ Parser::PrimaryExpressionParseResult Parser::parse_primary_expression()
goto read_as_identifier;
return { parse_await_expression() };
case TokenType::PrivateIdentifier:
VERIFY(next_token().type() == TokenType::In);
if (next_token().type() != TokenType::In)
syntax_error("Cannot have a private identifier in expression if not followed by 'in'");
if (!is_private_identifier_valid())
syntax_error(String::formatted("Reference to undeclared private field or method '{}'", m_state.current_token.value()));
return { create_ast_node<PrivateIdentifier>({ m_state.current_token.filename(), rule_start.position(), position() }, consume().value()) };
@ -3483,7 +3484,7 @@ bool Parser::match_expression() const
|| type == TokenType::TemplateLiteralStart
|| type == TokenType::NullLiteral
|| match_identifier()
|| (type == TokenType::PrivateIdentifier && next_token().type() == TokenType::In)
|| type == TokenType::PrivateIdentifier
|| type == TokenType::Await
|| type == TokenType::New
|| type == TokenType::Class

View file

@ -96,6 +96,18 @@ test("slash after private identifier is treated as division", () => {
expect(A.getDivided()).toBe(2);
});
test("private identifier not followed by 'in' throws", () => {
expect(`class A { #field = 2; method() { return #field instanceof 1; }}`).not.toEval();
expect(`class A { #field = 2; method() { return #field < 1; }}`).not.toEval();
expect(`class A { #field = 2; method() { return #field + 1; }}`).not.toEval();
expect(`class A { #field = 2; method() { return #field ** 1; }}`).not.toEval();
expect(`class A { #field = 2; method() { return !#field; } }`).not.toEval();
expect(`class A { #field = 2; method() { return ~#field; } }`).not.toEval();
expect(`class A { #field = 2; method() { return ++#field; } }`).not.toEval();
expect(`class A { #field = 2; method() { return #field in 1; }}`).toEval();
});
test("cannot have static and non static field with the same description", () => {
expect("class A { static #simple; #simple; }").not.toEval();
});