Test that we resolve code types in the setting.

So that users defining their own type that happens to be called Code,
Block, Regex and so forth will not find themselves in a pickle. If
there is real desire to override these, it is still possible, it just
needs a custom setting, which seems a fair trade-off.

S02-types/resolved-in-setting.t

@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+use v6;
+use Test;
+
+plan 4;
+
+# Shadow various code-object related types, and make sure we don't break
+# everything. This test file will not compile if code object types and
+# Parameter/Signature are not resolved by the compiler directly in the
+# setting, instead of the usual lexical lookup.
+
+my class Parameter { }
+my class Signature { }
+my class Code { }
+my class Block { }
+my class Routine { }
+my class Sub { }
+my class Method { }
+my class Regex { }
+
+is (-> $x { $x })(42), 42, 'Can use pointy block even with code types shadowed';
+is (sub ($x) { $x })(42), 42, 'Can declare sub even with code types shadowed';
+is class C { method m($x) { $x } }.m(42), 42, 'Can declare method even with code types shadowed';
+# RT #126728
+is 'abc' ~~ /\w/, 'a', 'Can use regex even with code types shadowed';