165580 - Using the getTime() method causes abrupt exit - no error messages

Status: VERIFIED DUPLICATE of bug 160602

(Core :: JavaScript Engine, defect)

Description

[Les Bessant]

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.1b) Gecko/20020721
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.1b) Gecko/20020721

I'm attempting to use JavaScript to force a reload of a webcam image every two
minutes. The technique works by appending a query string to the URL of the
image, the string being the result of getTime() on a new Date object. This works
perfectly in IE6, NS6, even Opera 6. Mozilla appears to take great exception to
this and exits immediately the getTime() method is used. The example is a
stripped down page  which just attempts to do a document.write of the getTime()
result. Nothing fancy, the page is validated XHTML.

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.Open Mozilla
2.Enter URL in address bar and press Enter
3.Watch Mozilla disappear from screen

Actual Results:  
Mozilla disappeared. No error message, not so much as a Dr Watson.

Expected Results:  
Either executed the standard JavaScript or at least produced an error message.

Comment 1

[Les Bessant]

Just updated browser to Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.1)
Gecko/20020826 - same result as with 1.1b

Comment 2

[alanjstr]

WFM Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826

Comment 3

[Phil Schwartau]

Les, thanks for catching this. We actually have an open bug on this:
bug 160602, in which it was found that getTime() could cause a crash.

It actually turned out not to be getTime() per se, but rather the way
JS is handling the large integers that such methods return.

You will be cc'ed on bug 160602 to follow its progress. When that bug
is markd "FIXED", your testcase should work (wait 24 hours after the
fix is announced before pulling a new Mozilla build).

If at such time your testcase still doesn't work, please reopen
bug 160602. Thanks -

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 160602 ***

Comment 4

[Phil Schwartau]

Verified Duplicate -