feat: unknown statements

[ematipico]

Summary

This PR does the following:

• created a new struct called ParseRecover where information the information needed for recovery are created passed to the parser;
• unified the functions err_recover and err_recover_no_err in one single function;
• the recovery logic is now encapsulated inside ParseRecover and the recovery logic is inside the recover function;
• created new test cases to track errors that were not tracked before;
• removed ERROR and added JS_UNKNOWN_STATEMENT in some particular case, specifically the parser has a function called stmt() that is called in those functions that tries to parse particular statements: if/else, do/while, while, for, etc., so every time this function fails, we emit an error;

Test Plan

cargo lint
cargo format
cargo test

[cloudflare-pages]

Deploying with    Cloudflare Pages

Latest commit:	7dc5762
Status:	✅  Deploy successful!
Preview URL:	https://f9e6a741.tools-8rn.pages.dev

View logs

[yassere]

What’s the advantage of combining these parameters into a RecoveryBag struct? It feels like it’s adding more boilerplate at the error recovery call sites in the parser.

[ematipico]

What’s the advantage of combining these parameters into a RecoveryBag struct? It feels like it’s adding more boilerplate at the error recovery call sites in the parser.

The parameters of the functions we use to recover from errors were becoming too many. Micha suggested to revisit it with a struct and I agree too. Also, it allows us to unify some logic in one single place and make the API better documented.

[MichaReiser]

I like the RecoveryBag and overall great improvements!

There are some cases where we now insert invalid children (e.g. expressions instead of statements).

Would you mind listing in the PR summary for parser rules your changing the error recovery?

[github-actions]

Test262 comparison coverage results on windows-latest

Test result	main count	This PR count	Difference
Total	17608	17608	0
Passed	16771	16771	0
Failed	836	836	0
Panics	1	1	0
Coverage	95.25%	95.25%	0.00%

[ematipico]

I reverted the changes I did around the parsing of switch. It fixed a infinite recursion inside the parser but it lowered the coverage, meaning that we'd need to spend more time around it.

[ematipico]

There are some cases where we now insert invalid children (e.g. expressions instead of statements).

Errors, now fixed.

Would you mind listing in the PR summary for parser rules your changing the error recovery?

Done

[MichaReiser]

Looks good. Please take a look at the comments from @yassere before merging.