archives

« Bugzilla Issues Index

#106 — Missing coverage? http://code.google.com/p/google-caja/issues/detail?id=528


<Thanks>Mark Miller</Thanks>

We might be missing coverage for the following test scenario. Add test case(s)
assuming this scenario can be mapped to ES5.1 somewhere
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
*See
http://codereview.appspot.com/4547070/diff/6003/src/com/google/caja/ses/es5shim.js?context=10&column_width=80
for the original*


122 * Work around for http://code.google.com/p/google-caja/issues/detail?id=528

123 *

124 * <p>This kludge is safety preserving.

125 */

126 function test_REGEXP_TEST_EXEC_UNSAFE() {

127 (/foo/).test('xfoox');

128 var match = new RegExp('(.|\r|\n)*','').exec()[0];

129 if (match === 'undefined') { return false; }

130 if (match === 'xfoox') {

131 log('RegExp.exec leaks match globally. ' +

132 'See http://code.google.com/p/google-caja/issues/detail?id=528');

133 } else {

134 log('New symptom: regExp.exec() does not match against "undefined".');

135 }

136 return true;

137 }

138 //var TOLERATE_REGEXP_TEST_EXEC_UNSAFE = false;

139 var TOLERATE_REGEXP_TEST_EXEC_UNSAFE = test_REGEXP_TEST_EXEC_UNSAFE();


Mark already added ch15/15.10/15.10.6/15.10.6.2/S15.10.6.2_A12.js for this.