Fix ObjectProperty patterns

[haltcase]

Q	A
Patch: Bug Fix?	yes
Major: Breaking Change?
Minor: New Feature?
Deprecations?
Spec Compliancy?	yes
Tests Added/Pass?
Fixed Tickets	Fixes #4741
License	MIT
Doc PR	no
Dependency Changes

Add Patterns to the ObjectProperty validator to fix nested patterns. #5722 has already been merged to fix ArrayPatterns.

Also add RestElement to allow object rest to appear.

Target case:

t.objectPattern([
  t.objectProperty(
    t.identifier('a'),
    t.objectPattern([
      t.objectProperty(
        t.identifier('b'),
        t.stringLiteral('foo')
      )
    ])
  )
])

[mention-bot]

@citycide, thanks for your PR! By analyzing the history of the files in this pull request, we identified @existentialism, @hzoo and @phantom10111 to be potential reviewers.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #5762 into 7.0 will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              7.0    #5762      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   84.63%   84.62%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         282      282              
  Lines        9854     9854              
  Branches     2766     2766              
==========================================
- Hits         8340     8339       -1     
- Misses       1000     1001       +1     
  Partials      514      514

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
packages/babel-types/src/definitions/core.js	98.21% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
packages/babel-traverse/src/visitors.js	85.71% <0%> (-0.96%)	⬇️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 853b9f8...e14412e. Read the comment docs.

[hzoo]

Awesome! Can we add a passing test too? https://github.com/babel/babel/blob/master/packages/babel-types/test/validators.js

[haltcase]

Added a test that includes uses of both the object pattern & the array pattern - let me know if there's any issues with the structure of that test, there just isn't a lot to reference in there yet 😆

[hzoo]

Nope sounds good to me! (just need a test to check that it's not failing)