This will crash your browser.
jsfiddle.net
jsfiddle.net
The site has a note, under "why", along the lines of resource limitations and process separation for tabs being a good idea. 5 years later, it still is.
On the plus side, all of the browsers have changed their UI a lot during those 5 years.
edit: looks like Chrome (or Chromium) has aged more gracefully than Firefox. It handles everything on the page with a minimum amount of fuss. Good. :-)
And "crash" is an exaggeration. The browser is prevented from functioning until it figures out that its processing power is being absorbed in something pointless, for example by badly written JavaScript:
function loop_forever() {
while(true) {
}
}
For those interested, the responsible code is located here:
dontclick://fiddle.jshell.net/n3Wa3/show/light/
And here is the code:
<script>
function Hackology()
{
var buffer = '\x42';
for (i =0;i<666;i++)
{
buffer+=buffer+'\x42';
document.write('<html><marquee><h1>'+buffer+buffer);
}
}
</script>That would be ideal, yes. Firefox still doesn't work this way, I think? Chrome (or rather: SRWare Iron in my case) does, though: this link, which I obviously had to click (I make no excuse :P) did crash the tab I opened it in, but it had zero influence on the rest of the tabs, or the interface in general.
True. The current Firefox locks up, then announces a crash:
http://i.imgur.com/vgd8PLV.png
So on that basis, Firefox isn't a "modern browser". :)
Any JavaScript that hogs the thread it's running in will cause this kind of problem. If the thread happens to be the same one the browser is running under, then "crash" is a fair description.
function hog_processor() {
while(true) {
}
}
function beginner_error_run_forever() {
for(var x = 0;x != 10;x += .1) {
// code here
}
}the while(1); thing could be explained easily, but the code for this one (written below) is not simply an endless loop
You may find this enlightening: Not only do nontrivial programs sometimes have unevaluated ways that will prevent their termination, but it's been proven that there cannot be a deterministic way to prove that a program will or will not terminate.
The Turing halting problem (will a given program terminate), and Godel's Incompleteness Theorems (nontrivial axiomatic systems can make true statements that cannot be proven), are connected -- each implies the other. And both have been shown to be more than educated guesses about reality.
No. Waited about five minutes. No crash.
Opera did crash though.
It's just not newsworthy, and it's a public nuisance to post such examples -- I mean a working example, as opposed to an inert code listing.
like this: view-source:http://fiddle.jshell.net/n3Wa3/show/light/
OR
http://jsfiddle.net/zalun/n3Wa3/embedded/html/
My point being, browsers should be able to recover from such code. What if some site's ad code has this in it. It shouldn't be able to crash my entire browser.
> I am sorry, but I found the code behind it interesting so posted it.
You should have posted a listing, not a working copy. That would have been the civilized, non-destructive thing to do.
> If you were smart enough, you could have accessed the html behind the page easily.
I did. But if you were smart enough, you would have done that and avoided performing an unscheduled test of the less technically skilled visitors' browsers ability to handle broken code.
> My point being, browsers should be able to recover from such code.
Why not set your car on fire? A modern car should be able to tolerate the flames, right? Where's your sense of adventure?
You just aren't thinking. This is a public forum visited by people representing all levels of skill.
Chrome for Win32 here.