381062 - JavaScript Tests - segregate tests with octal literals into /extensions/

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(Core :: JavaScript Engine, enhancement)

Description

[Bob Clary [:bc] (inactive)]

Jeff Dyer notes that ECMS 262 3rd edition dropped octal literals. Per Brendan, we should move these into the extensions sub suites so that they are not part of "core" testing.

Comment 1

[Jeff Dyer]

Here is an initial list. There may be others that use octal literals or escapes.

cma/GlobalObject/15.1.2.2-1.js
ecma/GlobalObject/15.1.2.3-1.js
ecma/GlobalObject/15.1.2.3-2.js
ecma/GlobalObject/15.1.2.6.js
ecma/GlobalObject/15.1.2.7.js
ecma/LexicalConventions/7.5-2-n.js
ecma/LexicalConventions/7.5-8-n.js
ecma/LexicalConventions/7.7.3-1.js
ecma/LexicalConventions/7.7.3-2.js
ecma/LexicalConventions/7.7.3.js
ecma/LexicalConventions/7.7.4.js
ecma/Math/15.8.2.1.js
ecma/TypeConversion/9.3.1-3.js
ecma_2/Exceptions/lexical-039.js
ecma_2/RegExp/octal-003.js
ecma_2/RegExp/properties-001.js
ecma_3/RegExp/octal-001.js
ecma_3/RegExp/octal-002.js
ecma_3/RegExp/regress-122076.js

Comment 2

[Bob Clary [:bc] (inactive)]

(In reply to comment #1)

map older spec sections to ecma3. I certainly hope es4 does a better job at this type of thing and doesn't use word to write the spec! ;-)

<http://bclary.com/2004/11/07/#a-15.1.2.2> parseInt(string , radix) 
> ecma/GlobalObject/15.1.2.2-1.js
There doesn't appear to be a test of the implementation decision in the where the radix might be interpreted as octal.
<quote>
Note.
When radix is 0 or undefined and the string's number begins with a 0 digit not followed by an x or X, then the implementation may, at its discretion, interpret the number either as being octal or as being decimal. Implementations are encouraged to interpret numbers in this case as being decimal.
</quote>

<http://bclary.com/2004/11/07/#a-15.1.2.3> parseFloat(string)
> ecma/GlobalObject/15.1.2.3-1.js
> ecma/GlobalObject/15.1.2.3-2.js

<http://bclary.com/2004/11/07/#a-15.1.2.4> isNaN(number)
> ecma/GlobalObject/15.1.2.6.js

<http://bclary.com/2004/11/07/#a-15.1.2.5> isFinite(number)
> ecma/GlobalObject/15.1.2.7.js

<http://bclary.com/2004/11/07/#a-7.6> Identifiers
> ecma/LexicalConventions/7.5-2-n.js
> ecma/LexicalConventions/7.5-8-n.js
> ecma_2/Exceptions/lexical-039.js

<http://bclary.com/2004/11/07/#a-7.8.3> Numeric Literals
> ecma/LexicalConventions/7.7.3-1.js
> ecma/LexicalConventions/7.7.3-2.js
> ecma/LexicalConventions/7.7.3.js

<http://bclary.com/2004/11/07/#a-7.8.4> String Literals
> ecma/LexicalConventions/7.7.4.js

<http://bclary.com/2004/11/07/#a-15.8.2.1>  abs(x)
> ecma/Math/15.8.2.1.js

<http://bclary.com/2004/11/07/#a-9.3.1> ToNumber Applied to the String Type
> ecma/TypeConversion/9.3.1-3.js

<http://bclary.com/2004/11/07/#a-15.10.7> Properties of RegExp Instances
> ecma_2/RegExp/properties-001.js

> ecma_3/RegExp/regress-122076.js
This is a simple crash test that doesn't test the result. I think it can stay.

Definitely, totally -> extensions.
> ecma_2/RegExp/octal-003.js
> ecma_3/RegExp/octal-001.js
> ecma_3/RegExp/octal-002.js

Comment 3

[André Bargull [:anba]]

Legacy octal literals are present (again?) in the spec, therefore resolving as WONTFIX.