1.1 --- /dev/null Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000
1.2 +++ b/js/src/tests/js1_5/String/regress-179068.js Wed Dec 31 06:09:35 2014 +0100
1.3 @@ -0,0 +1,125 @@
1.4 +/* -*- Mode: C++; tab-width: 2; indent-tabs-mode: nil; c-basic-offset: 2 -*- */
1.5 +/* This Source Code Form is subject to the terms of the Mozilla Public
1.6 + * License, v. 2.0. If a copy of the MPL was not distributed with this
1.7 + * file, You can obtain one at http://mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/. */
1.8 +
1.9 +/*
1.10 + *
1.11 + * Date: 09 November 2002
1.12 + * SUMMARY: Test that interpreter can handle string literals exceeding 64K
1.13 + * See http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=179068
1.14 + *
1.15 + * Test that the interpreter can handle string literals exceeding 64K limit.
1.16 + * For that the script passes to eval() "str ='LONG_STRING_LITERAL';" where
1.17 + * LONG_STRING_LITERAL is a string with 200K chars.
1.18 + *
1.19 + * Igor Bukanov explains the technique used below:
1.20 + *
1.21 + * > Philip Schwartau wrote:
1.22 + * >...
1.23 + * > Here is the heart of the testcase:
1.24 + * >
1.25 + * > // Generate 200K long string
1.26 + * > var long_str = duplicate(LONG_STR_SEED, N);
1.27 + * > var str = "";
1.28 + * > eval("str='".concat(long_str, "';"));
1.29 + * > var test_is_ok = (str.length == LONG_STR_SEED.length * N);
1.30 + * >
1.31 + * >
1.32 + * > The testcase creates two identical strings, |long_str| and |str|. It
1.33 + * > uses eval() simply to assign the value of |long_str| to |str|. Why is
1.34 + * > it necessary to have the variable |str|, then? Why not just create
1.35 + * > |long_str| and test it? Wouldn't this be enough:
1.36 + * >
1.37 + * > // Generate 200K long string
1.38 + * > var long_str = duplicate(LONG_STR_SEED, N);
1.39 + * > var test_is_ok = (long_str.length == LONG_STR_SEED.length * N);
1.40 + * >
1.41 + * > Or do we specifically need to test eval() to exercise the interpreter?
1.42 + *
1.43 + * The reason for eval is to test string literals like in 'a string literal
1.44 + * with 100 000 characters...', Rhino deals fine with strings generated at
1.45 + * run time where lengths > 64K. Without eval it would be necessary to have
1.46 + * a test file excedding 64K which is not that polite for CVS and then a
1.47 + * special treatment for the compiled mode in Rhino should be added.
1.48 + *
1.49 + *
1.50 + * >
1.51 + * > If so, is it important to use the concat() method in the assignment, as
1.52 + * > you have done: |eval("str='".concat(long_str, "';"))|, or can we simply
1.53 + * > do |eval("str = long_str;")| ?
1.54 + *
1.55 + * The concat is a replacement for eval("str='"+long_str+"';"), but as
1.56 + * long_str is huge, this leads to constructing first a new string via
1.57 + * "str='"+long_str and then another one via ("str='"+long_str) + "';"
1.58 + * which takes time under JDK 1.1 on a something like StrongArm 200MHz.
1.59 + * Calling concat makes less copies, that is why it is used in the
1.60 + * duplicate function and this is faster then doing recursion like in the
1.61 + * test case to test that 64K different string literals can be handled.
1.62 + *
1.63 + */
1.64 +//-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.65 +var UBound = 0;
1.66 +var BUGNUMBER = 179068;
1.67 +var summary = 'Test that interpreter can handle string literals exceeding 64K';
1.68 +var status = '';
1.69 +var statusitems = [];
1.70 +var actual = '';
1.71 +var actualvalues = [];
1.72 +var expect= '';
1.73 +var expectedvalues = [];
1.74 +var LONG_STR_SEED = "0123456789";
1.75 +var N = 20 * 1024;
1.76 +var str = "";
1.77 +
1.78 +
1.79 +// Generate 200K long string and assign it to |str| via eval()
1.80 +var long_str = duplicate(LONG_STR_SEED, N);
1.81 +eval("str='".concat(long_str, "';"));
1.82 +
1.83 +status = inSection(1);
1.84 +actual = str.length == LONG_STR_SEED.length * N
1.85 + expect = true;
1.86 +addThis();
1.87 +
1.88 +
1.89 +
1.90 +//-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.91 +test();
1.92 +//-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.93 +
1.94 +
1.95 +
1.96 +function duplicate(str, count)
1.97 +{
1.98 + var tmp = new Array(count);
1.99 +
1.100 + while (count != 0)
1.101 + tmp[--count] = str;
1.102 +
1.103 + return String.prototype.concat.apply("", tmp);
1.104 +}
1.105 +
1.106 +
1.107 +function addThis()
1.108 +{
1.109 + statusitems[UBound] = status;
1.110 + actualvalues[UBound] = actual;
1.111 + expectedvalues[UBound] = expect;
1.112 + UBound++;
1.113 +}
1.114 +
1.115 +
1.116 +function test()
1.117 +{
1.118 + enterFunc('test');
1.119 + printBugNumber(BUGNUMBER);
1.120 + printStatus(summary);
1.121 +
1.122 + for (var i=0; i<UBound; i++)
1.123 + {
1.124 + reportCompare(expectedvalues[i], actualvalues[i], statusitems[i]);
1.125 + }
1.126 +
1.127 + exitFunc ('test');
1.128 +}
