Minor change; see Brendan's comment at 2001-04-19 12:00 in Bugzilla bug 76634.

This commit is contained in:
pschwartau%netscape.com 2001-04-20 04:57:51 +00:00
parent 71eb5ec205
commit 892a6cc261

View File

@ -33,16 +33,16 @@
* Date: 11 August 1998
* REVISED: 04 February 2001
* (changed the comma expressions from trivial to non-trivial)
* Author: pschwartau@netscape.com
* Author: pschwartau@netscape.com
*
* Brendan: "The test seemed to require something that ECMA does not
* Brendan: "The test seemed to require something that ECMA does not
* guarantee, and that JS1.4 didn't either. For example, given
*
* dec2 = "function f2(){1,2}";
*
* the engine is free to decompile a function object compiled from this source,
* via Function.prototype.toString(), into some other string that compiles to
* an equivalent function. The engine now eliminates the useless comma expression
* via Function.prototype.toString(), into some other string that compiles to
* an equivalent function. The engine now eliminates the useless comma expression
* 1,2, giving function f2(){}. This should be legal by the testsuite's lights."
*
*/
@ -57,8 +57,8 @@
var testcases = new Array();
dec1 = "function f1(x,y){++x, --y}";
dec2 = "function f2(){var y; f1(1,2), y=function g(x){return Math.exp(x);}; print(y.toString())}";
dec1 = "function f1(x,y){++x, --y}";
dec2 = "function f2(){var y; f1(1,2); y=new Date(); print(y.toString())}";
eval(dec1);
eval(dec2);