Closed
Bug 763313
Opened 12 years ago
Closed 12 years ago
Braceless functions have their destructuring-args bytecode duplicated
Categories
(Core :: JavaScript Engine, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla16
People
(Reporter: jruderman, Assigned: Benjamin)
References
Details
(Keywords: regression, testcase)
Attachments
(1 file)
1.42 KB,
patch
|
jorendorff
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
js> (function ([]) 1) (function ([]) let [] = arguments[0];1) jsfunfuzz noticed this bug because it makes decompilation introduce a syntax error in some contexts: js> (function () {for (var x in (function ([]) 1)) {}}) (function () {for (var x in (function ([]) let [] = arguments[0];1)) {}})
Reporter | ||
Comment 1•12 years ago
|
||
js> dis(function ([]) 1) flags: LAMBDA EXPR_CLOSURE NULL_CLOSURE loc op ----- -- main: 00000: getarg 0 00003: dup 00004: pop 00005: pop 00006: getarg 0 00009: dup 00010: pop 00011: pop 00012: one 00013: return 00014: stop Source notes: ofs line pc delta desc args ---- ---- ----- ------ -------- ------ 0: 14 3 [ 3] decl offset 2 2: 14 9 [ 6] decl offset 2
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•12 years ago
|
||
Regression from bug 759498.
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•12 years ago
|
||
Assignee: general → bpeterson
Attachment #631769 -
Flags: review?(jorendorff)
Comment 4•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 631769 [details] [diff] [review] fix Nice work. I dig the test. Feel free to rename PNK_SEQ to something else. (If you want to clean this up more I'd be happy to review, but that's totally optional.) Is PNX_DESTRUCT always set in this case? Can you assert it instead of checking?
Attachment #631769 -
Flags: review?(jorendorff) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Jason Orendorff [:jorendorff] from comment #4) > Comment on attachment 631769 [details] [diff] [review] > fix > > Nice work. I dig the test. > > Feel free to rename PNK_SEQ to something else. (If you want to clean this up > more I'd be happy to review, but that's totally optional.) What would I rename it to? I think PNK_SEQ is supposed to be a generic sequence of statements. It's also used somewhere in for loops, too. > > Is PNX_DESTRUCT always set in this case? Can you assert it instead of > checking? No, PNK_SEQ appears in for loops, too.
Comment 6•12 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/2bcd13a8efb3
Flags: in-testsuite+
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla16
Comment 7•12 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/2bcd13a8efb3
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•