1 files changed, 154 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Source/JavaScriptCore/tests/mozilla/js1_5/String/regress-179068.js b/Source/JavaScriptCore/tests/mozilla/js1_5/String/regress-179068.js
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c45f885
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Source/JavaScriptCore/tests/mozilla/js1_5/String/regress-179068.js
@@ -0,0 +1,154 @@
+/* ***** BEGIN LICENSE BLOCK *****
+* Version: NPL 1.1/GPL 2.0/LGPL 2.1
+*
+* The contents of this file are subject to the Netscape Public License
+* Version 1.1 (the "License"); you may not use this file except in
+* compliance with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
+* http://www.mozilla.org/NPL/
+*
+* Software distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" basis,
+* WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. See the License
+* for the specific language governing rights and limitations under the
+* License.
+*
+* The Original Code is JavaScript Engine testing utilities.
+*
+* The Initial Developer of the Original Code is Netscape Communications Corp.
+* Portions created by the Initial Developer are Copyright (C) 2002
+* the Initial Developer. All Rights Reserved.
+*
+* Contributor(s): igor@icesoft.no, pschwartau@netscape.com
+*
+* Alternatively, the contents of this file may be used under the terms of
+* either the GNU General Public License Version 2 or later (the "GPL"), or
+* the GNU Lesser General Public License Version 2.1 or later (the "LGPL"),
+* in which case the provisions of the GPL or the LGPL are applicable instead
+* of those above. If you wish to allow use of your version of this file only
+* under the terms of either the GPL or the LGPL, and not to allow others to
+* use your version of this file under the terms of the NPL, indicate your
+* decision by deleting the provisions above and replace them with the notice
+* and other provisions required by the GPL or the LGPL. If you do not delete
+* the provisions above, a recipient may use your version of this file under
+* the terms of any one of the NPL, the GPL or the LGPL.
+*
+* ***** END LICENSE BLOCK *****
+*
+*
+* Date:    09 November 2002
+* SUMMARY: Test that interpreter can handle string literals exceeding 64K
+* See http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=179068
+*
+* Test that the interpreter can handle string literals exceeding 64K limit.
+* For that the script passes to eval() "str ='LONG_STRING_LITERAL';" where
+* LONG_STRING_LITERAL is a string with 200K chars.
+*
+* Igor Bukanov explains the technique used below:
+*
+* > Philip Schwartau wrote:
+* >...
+* > Here is the heart of the testcase:
+* >
+* >   // Generate 200K long string
+* >   var long_str = duplicate(LONG_STR_SEED, N);
+* >   var str = "";
+* >   eval("str='".concat(long_str, "';"));
+* >   var test_is_ok = (str.length == LONG_STR_SEED.length * N);
+* >
+* >
+* > The testcase creates two identical strings, |long_str| and |str|. It
+* > uses eval() simply to assign the value of |long_str| to |str|. Why is
+* > it necessary to have the variable |str|, then? Why not just create
+* > |long_str| and test it? Wouldn't this be enough:
+* >
+* >   // Generate 200K long string
+* >   var long_str = duplicate(LONG_STR_SEED, N);
+* >   var test_is_ok = (long_str.length == LONG_STR_SEED.length * N);
+* >
+* > Or do we specifically need to test eval() to exercise the interpreter?
+*
+* The reason for eval is to test string literals like in 'a string literal
+* with 100 000 characters...', Rhino deals fine with strings generated at
+* run time where lengths > 64K. Without eval it would be necessary to have
+* a test file excedding 64K which is not that polite for CVS and then a
+* special treatment for the compiled mode in Rhino should be added.
+*
+*
+* >
+* > If so, is it important to use the concat() method in the assignment, as
+* > you have done: |eval("str='".concat(long_str, "';"))|, or can we simply
+* > do |eval("str = long_str;")| ?
+*
+* The concat is a replacement for eval("str='"+long_str+"';"), but as
+* long_str is huge, this leads to constructing first a new string via
+* "str='"+long_str and then another one via ("str='"+long_str) + "';"
+* which takes time under JDK 1.1 on a something like StrongArm 200MHz.
+* Calling concat makes less copies, that is why it is used in the
+* duplicate function and this is faster then doing recursion like in the
+* test case to test that 64K different string literals can be handled.
+*
+*/
+//-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+var UBound = 0;
+var bug = 179068;
+var summary = 'Test that interpreter can handle string literals exceeding 64K';
+var status = '';
+var statusitems = [];
+var actual = '';
+var actualvalues = [];
+var expect= '';
+var expectedvalues = [];
+var LONG_STR_SEED = "0123456789";
+var N = 20 * 1024;
+var str = "";
+
+
+// Generate 200K long string and assign it to |str| via eval()
+var long_str = duplicate(LONG_STR_SEED, N);
+eval("str='".concat(long_str, "';"));
+
+status = inSection(1);
+actual = str.length == LONG_STR_SEED.length * N
+expect = true;
+addThis();
+
+
+
+//-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+test();
+//-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+
+
+function duplicate(str, count)
+{
+  var tmp = new Array(count);
+
+  while (count != 0)
+    tmp[--count] = str;
+
+  return String.prototype.concat.apply("", tmp);
+}
+
+
+function addThis()
+{
+  statusitems[UBound] = status;
+  actualvalues[UBound] = actual;
+  expectedvalues[UBound] = expect;
+  UBound++;
+}
+
+
+function test()
+{
+  enterFunc('test');
+  printBugNumber(bug);
+  printStatus(summary);
+
+  for (var i=0; i<UBound; i++)
+  {
+    reportCompare(expectedvalues[i], actualvalues[i], statusitems[i]);
+  }
+
+  exitFunc ('test');
+}