High Level Feature Ship Checklist.¶
(Note: Some of these pieces can happen in parallel, so it’s not necessary to work directly top-down)
☐ Send an Intent to Prototype email to
dev-platform. This is part of the Exposure Guidelines process. We historically haven’t been amazing at sending intent-to-prototype emails, but we can always get better.
☐ Create a shell option for the feature.
☐ Stage 2 or earlier proposals should be developed under compile time guards, disabled by default.
☐ Create a browser preference for the feature.
☐ Implement the Feature.
☐ Land feature disabled by pref and shell-option.
☐ Import the test262 test cases for the feature, or enable them if they’re already imported. (See
firstname.lastname@example.org arrange fuzzing for the feature.
☐ Add shell option to
js/src/shell/fuzz-flags.txt. This signals to other fuzzers as well that the feature is ready for fuzzing.
☐ Send an Intent to Ship Email to
dev-platform. This is also part of the Exposure Guidelines process.
☐ Ship the feature; default the preference to true and the command-line option to true.
☐ Open a followup bug to later remove the preference and the command line option.
Shipping Consideration Checklist¶
☐ If it seems possible that the feature will cause webcompat issues, consider shipping
NIGHTLY_ONLYfor a cycle or two, to use nightly as an attempt to shake out potential webcompat issues.
Web Platform Integration Checklist¶
Sometimes Complexity of the web-platform leaks into JS Feature works
☐ Ensure the appropriate web-platform tests exist, and are being run.
☐ Is your feature correctly enabled inside of Workers? (They have different option set than main thread, and it’s easy to forget them!) You may want to write a mochitest.
Syntax Features Checklist¶
Reflect.parsecorrectly parse and return results for your new syntax?
Reflect.parsetests are interesting as well, because they can be written for new syntax before bytecode emission is done.
☐ Are the locations correct for the new syntax entries in the parse tree?
☐ Are your errors emitted with sensible location info?
Testing Consideration Checklist¶
There’s lots of complexity in SpiderMonkey that isn’t always captured by the specification, so the below is some useful guidance to behaviour to pay attention to that may not be tested by a feature’s test262 tests
☐ How does your feature interact with multiple compartments? What happens if references happen across compartments, or if
☐ Are your error messages being emitted in the correct realm, with the correct prototype?
☐ If async functions or promises are involved, are user-code objects resolved? If so, does the feature correctly handle the
.thenproperty behaviour of promise resolution?
☐ Have you written some OOM tests for your feature to ensure your OOM handling is correct?
Web Platform Testing Considerations¶
☐ Does the feature have to handle exotic objects specially? Consider what happens when your feature interacts with the very exotic objects on the web platform, such as
☐ What happens when your feature interacts with X-rays?