lib: pass internalBinding more implicitly - #16218
Closed
addaleax wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
Conversation
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
Sorry, something went wrong.
Modify passing of the `internalBinding` function so that it’s easier for core modules to adopt, and also not even accessible through `--expose-internals`. This also splits the module wrapper into a separate version for internal bindings and for CJS modules, which seems like a good idea given the different semantics.
addaleax
force-pushed
the
internal-bindings
branch
from
587834c to
60c862f
Compare
October 15, 2017 10:23
bnoordhuis
approved these changes
Oct 15, 2017
cjihrig
approved these changes
Oct 15, 2017
cjihrig
left a comment
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM if the CI passes.
Sorry, something went wrong.
refack
approved these changes
Oct 15, 2017
jasnell
approved these changes
Oct 15, 2017
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
Sorry, something went wrong.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
|
Failures in CI are unrelated. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
19 tasks
addaleax
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 18, 2017
Modify passing of the `internalBinding` function so that it’s easier for core modules to adopt, and also not even accessible through `--expose-internals`. This also splits the module wrapper into a separate version for internal bindings and for CJS modules, which seems like a good idea given the different semantics. PR-URL: #16218 Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <refack@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
addaleax
added a commit
to ayojs/ayo
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 18, 2017
Modify passing of the `internalBinding` function so that it’s easier for core modules to adopt, and also not even accessible through `--expose-internals`. This also splits the module wrapper into a separate version for internal bindings and for CJS modules, which seems like a good idea given the different semantics. PR-URL: nodejs/node#16218 Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <refack@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
|
Should this be backported to 8.x? If so would you be willing to do so @addaleax ? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
|
Should this be backported to v6.x-staging? If yes please follow the guide and raise a backport PR, if not let me know or add the dont-land-on label. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
|
After talking with @addaleax I am going to backport this to v8.x |
Sorry, something went wrong.
joyeecheung
pushed a commit
to joyeecheung/node
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 15, 2018
Modify passing of the `internalBinding` function so that it’s easier for core modules to adopt, and also not even accessible through `--expose-internals`. This also splits the module wrapper into a separate version for internal bindings and for CJS modules, which seems like a good idea given the different semantics. PR-URL: nodejs#16218 Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <refack@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
joyeecheung
pushed a commit
to joyeecheung/node
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 13, 2018
Modify passing of the `internalBinding` function so that it’s easier for core modules to adopt, and also not even accessible through `--expose-internals`. This also splits the module wrapper into a separate version for internal bindings and for CJS modules, which seems like a good idea given the different semantics. PR-URL: nodejs#16218 Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <refack@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Reviewers
8 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Modify passing of the internalBinding function so that it’s easier for core modules to adopt, and also not even accessible through --expose-internals.
This also splits the module wrapper into a separate version for internal bindings and for CJS modules, which seems like a good idea given the different semantics.
Checklist
Affected core subsystem(s)
lib