Chromium Code Reviews| Index: test/mjsunit/regress/regress-91120.js |
| diff --git a/test/mjsunit/regress/regress-91120.js b/test/mjsunit/regress/regress-91120.js |
| index 117acac6cdcfbb3bd2fe28d84df8c547c7c49d42..73f545648aff8ba7bbdc88f42a8897d4f37c9129 100644 |
| --- a/test/mjsunit/regress/regress-91120.js |
| +++ b/test/mjsunit/regress/regress-91120.js |
| @@ -25,24 +25,26 @@ |
| // (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE |
| // OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. |
| -// We intend that the function declaration for g inside catch is hoisted to |
| -// function f's scope. Invoke it before try/catch, in the try block, in the |
| -// catch block, after try/catch, and outside f, and verify that it has |
| -// access to the proper binding of x. |
| +// With ES2015 function hoisting semantics, functions are only "hoisted" out |
|
adamk
2016/01/05 19:19:05
One more test that could be retained with proper f
Dan Ehrenberg
2016/01/06 00:27:57
The bug was all about a crash. This regression tes
|
| +// of blocks by writing their values into var-scoped declarations. Therefore, |
| +// they access the catch binding when it syntactically appears so. |
| +// This is a potentially breaking change vs the old semantics, which would |
| +// return 'function' from g() everywhere. |
| + |
| var x = 'global'; |
| function f() { |
| var x = 'function'; |
| - assertEquals('function', g()); |
| + assertEquals(undefined, g); |
| try { |
| - assertEquals('function', g()); |
| + assertEquals(undefined, g); |
| throw 'catch'; |
| } catch (x) { |
| function g() { return x; } |
| - assertEquals('function', g()); |
| + assertEquals('catch', g()); |
| } |
| - assertEquals('function', g()); |
| + assertEquals('catch', g()); |
| return g; |
| } |
| -assertEquals('function', f()()); |
| +assertEquals('catch', f()()); |