1 files changed, 48 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/js/src/tests/non262/regress/regress-96128-n.js b/js/src/tests/non262/regress/regress-96128-n.js
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..4d7cbb0e64
--- /dev/null
+++ b/js/src/tests/non262/regress/regress-96128-n.js
@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+/* -*- indent-tabs-mode: nil; js-indent-level: 2 -*- */
+/* This Source Code Form is subject to the terms of the Mozilla Public
+ * License, v. 2.0. If a copy of the MPL was not distributed with this
+ * file, You can obtain one at http://mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/. */
+
+/*
+ * Date: 29 Aug 2001
+ *
+ * SUMMARY: Negative test that JS infinite recursion protection works.
+ * We expect the code here to fail (i.e. exit code 3), but NOT crash.
+ *
+ * See http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96128
+ */
+//-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+var BUGNUMBER = 96128;
+var summary = 'Testing that JS infinite recursion protection works';
+
+
+function objRecurse()
+{
+  /*
+   * jband:
+   *
+   * Causes a stack overflow crash in debug builds of both the browser
+   * and the shell. In the release builds this is safely caught by the
+   * "too much recursion" mechanism. If I remove the 'new' from the code below
+   * this is safely caught in both debug and release builds. The 'new' causes a
+   * lookup for the Constructor name and seems to (at least) double the number
+   * of items on the C stack for the given interpLevel depth.
+   */
+  return new objRecurse();
+}
+
+
+
+//-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+test();
+//-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+
+function test()
+{
+  printBugNumber(BUGNUMBER);
+  printStatus (summary);
+
+  // we expect this to fail (exit code 3), but NOT crash. -
+  var obj = new objRecurse();
+}