`[].push.apply([], a)` results in "Out of stack space"

[alexlamsl]

• Version: 8.11.1
• Platform: Windows 10 x64

test.js

var a = [];
for (var i = 65536; --i >= 0;) a.push(i);
[].push.apply([], a);

node runs to completion, whereas node-chakracore fails with:

$ node test.js
test.js:3
[].push.apply([], a);
^

Error: Out of stack space
   at Anonymous function (test.js:3:1)
   at Module.prototype._compile (module.js:652:5)
   at Module._extensions[.js] (module.js:663:3)
   at Module.prototype.load (module.js:565:3)
   at tryModuleLoad (module.js:505:5)
   at Module._load (module.js:497:3)
   at Module.runMain (module.js:693:3)
   at startup (bootstrap_node.js:189:9)
   at Anonymous function (bootstrap_node.js:613:3)

I have observed failures with shorter lengths than 65536, but they are not as reliably reproducible. While I appreciate this is a lot of parameters to pass on to Function.apply(), it is an efficient way to construct a large array, e.g. https://github.com/mishoo/UglifyJS2/blob/b5bab254ce2122a43e9ca0fdc757aecda7191576/test/mocha/parentheses.js#L93-L95

[MSLaguana]

I'm curious why you use push rather than concat:

var start = process.hrtime();
var c = [1,2];
for(let i = 0; i < 16; ++i) {c = [].concat.call(c,c)}
console.log(process.hrtime(start))

And actually, comparing with node-v8 on the sample in your mocha test, the concat version is faster in addition to using less stack.

[alexlamsl]

I did push() instead of concat() to minimise memory allocation, though I haven't considered call() being faster than apply().

Thanks for the workaround – will apply to mishoo/UglifyJS#3087

[alexlamsl]

I shall close this since it's a special case and more to do with deficiencies of ChakraCore than this project.