Added this to the M3 milestone.

This comment was originally written by ngeoffray@google.com

CL https://codereview.chromium.org/11866003/ implements support for non-repeating timers with 0 milliseconds delay. Other timers are still not supported.

cc @floitschG.

We're not going to implement more timer support for M3.

Removed this from the M3 milestone.
Added this to the M4 milestone.
Changed the title to: "dart2js: timer interface is not supported".

Removed this from the M4 milestone.
Added this to the M5 milestone.

Issue #10109 has been merged into this issue.

Added TriageForM5 label.

Removed this from the M5 milestone.
Added this to the Later milestone.
Removed TriageForM5 label.

The d8 preamble now simulates non-zero timers as well.
This code could probably work for jsshell as well, but hasn't been used.
If it can be reused without having to duplicate the same code in two files, it would be preferable.

Removed this from the Later milestone.
Added Oldschool-Milestone-Later label.

Removed Oldschool-Milestone-Later label.

Working as intended. We can simulate some of their functionality but they are not available on these platforms.

We could keep this bug, for the jsshell. There are still lots of tests that are marked as failing because of it, and it should be feasible (if not trivial) to adapt the v8 code for jsshell.

I'm pretty sure we can just copy the d8 preamble and use it for jsshell as well. At least the timer code is completely generic.
The reason I haven't done so yet is that that would leave use with no testing setting where timers are not available, so we would never test the "timers not available" code.

I don't think we need the "timers not available" code tested.
I prefer having jsshell tested.
/cc @sigmundch what do you prefer?

It seems that we can get more value from having jsshell tested, so my preference is towards that too.

Since the extra code lives in a preamble, we could technically also have extra test-only preambles if we want to cover specific error-code functionality. How complex would it be to add a single test that uses a test-specific preamble? Is that worth the effort?

I don't think it's worth the effort. Our customers run in the browser, and there timers exist.
Furthermore, we can always recommend to use our preambles when running outside the browser.

sgtm

(reopened to track adding timer support in the jsshell preamble, hopefully by simply coping it from the d8 preamble)