1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
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');
}
|
