Advance to stage 3

[gibson042]

Criteria taken from the TC39 process document minus those from previous stages:

• Complete spec text

https://github.com/tc39/proposal-json-parse-with-source/blob/master/spec.html
https://tc39.es/proposal-json-parse-with-source/

• Designated reviewers have signed off on the current spec text

• Michael Ficarra (@michaelficarra) Stage 3 Specification Review: Michael Ficarra #28
• Waldemar Horwat (@waldemarhorwat) Stage 3 Specification Review: Waldemar Horwat #29

• The ECMAScript editor has signed off on the current spec text

[gibson042]

@michaelficarra @waldemarhorwat I believe this is ready for review: https://tc39.es/proposal-json-parse-with-source/

[michaelficarra]

@gibson042 Spec text LGTM, though I'd prefer if we could use ParseText in JSON.rawJSON steps 2/3. Is there a reason we don't mimic the use of ParseText in JSON.parse?

[gibson042]

JSON.rawJSON does mirror JSON.parse; step 3 of the latter matches step 2 of the former with an extra constraint. It doesn't use ParseText because it has no use for a parse tree, but are you suggesting a refactor for perfect alignment of the first two steps?

1. Let _jsonString_ be ? ToString(_text_).
1. Parse StringToCodePoints(_jsonString_) as a JSON text as specified in ECMA-404. Throw a *SyntaxError* exception if it is not a valid JSON text as defined in that specification.
1. If _jsonString_ is the empty String, or if either the first or last code unit of jsonString is any of `{`, `[`, 0x0009 (CHARACTER TABULATION), 0x000A (LINE FEED), 0x000D (CARRIAGE RETURN), or 0x0020 (SPACE), throw a **SyntaxError** exception.