diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'js/src/tests/test262/built-ins/RegExp/lookBehind/sliced-strings.js')
| -rw-r--r-- | js/src/tests/test262/built-ins/RegExp/lookBehind/sliced-strings.js | 22 |
1 files changed, 22 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/js/src/tests/test262/built-ins/RegExp/lookBehind/sliced-strings.js b/js/src/tests/test262/built-ins/RegExp/lookBehind/sliced-strings.js new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..1e3b5f6367 --- /dev/null +++ b/js/src/tests/test262/built-ins/RegExp/lookBehind/sliced-strings.js @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ +// Copyright (C) 2017 the V8 project authors. All rights reserved. +// This code is governed by the BSD license found in the LICENSE file. + +/*--- +esid: sec-assertion +description: Sliced strings +info: | + Rationale from https://github.com/tc39/test262/pull/999#discussion_r113807747 + + Since this test originates from V8, this targets V8's sliced strings, which are used for + substrings above a length of 13 characters. I wrote this test for exactly the reason + @littledan mentioned. That's why the variable name is called oob_subject. The underlying string + backing store extends beyond the actual boundary of the sliced string. +features: [regexp-lookbehind] +---*/ + +var oob_subject = "abcdefghijklmnabcdefghijklmn".slice(14); +assert.sameValue(oob_subject.match(/(?=(abcdefghijklmn))(?<=\1)a/i), null, ""); +assert.sameValue(oob_subject.match(/(?=(abcdefghijklmn))(?<=\1)a/), null, ""); +assert.sameValue("abcdefgabcdefg".slice(1).match(/(?=(abcdefg))(?<=\1)/), null, ""); + +reportCompare(0, 0); |