FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending |
URL:
| Home
Tools: [Download Repo ZIP]   [Original HTTPS Page]

lib: move initialization of APIs for changing process state by addaleax · Pull Request #31172 · nodejs/node · GitHub

/ node Public

lib: move initialization of APIs for changing process state - #31172

Closed
addaleax wants to merge 2 commits into
nodejs:masterfrom
addaleax:fix-process-apis-switch
Closed

lib: move initialization of APIs for changing process state#31172
addaleax wants to merge 2 commits into
nodejs:masterfrom
addaleax:fix-process-apis-switch

Conversation

addaleax commented Jan 3, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Whether these APIs should be available for Node.js instances
semantically depends on whether the current Node.js instance
was assigned ownership of process-wide state, and not whether
it refers to the main thread or not.

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • commit message follows commit guidelines

Whether these APIs should be available for Node.js instances
semantically depends on whether the current Node.js instance
was assigned ownership of process-wide state, and not whether
it refers to the main thread or not.
addaleax force-pushed the fix-process-apis-switch branch from 6e65b57 to c13bb0f Compare January 3, 2020 06:07

nodejs-github-bot commented Jan 3, 2020
edited by addaleax
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/28157/ (:white_check_mark:)

BridgeAR added author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no outstanding review comments, and a CI started. lib / src Issues and PRs related to general changes in the lib or src directory. labels Jan 3, 2020

Trott commented Jan 4, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@joyeecheung

joyeecheung left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality

LGTM with a nit

function wrappedUmask(mask) {
// process.umask() is a read-only operation in workers.
if (mask !== undefined) {
throw new ERR_WORKER_UNSUPPORTED_OPERATION('Setting process.umask()');

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality

Note: this reads Setting process.umask() is not supported in workers, apart from that we need to get rid of the worker part from the message, maybe calling process.umask() as a setter would be less ambiguous (I thought it was about process.umask = something from the first glance)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality

Should this be changed before landing?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality

I don’t think so – it’s unrelated to the changes here.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Trott commented Jan 6, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Landed in 20fd123

Trott closed this Jan 6, 2020
Trott pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 6, 2020
Whether these APIs should be available for Node.js instances
semantically depends on whether the current Node.js instance
was assigned ownership of process-wide state, and not whether
it refers to the main thread or not.

PR-URL: #31172
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <joyeec9h3@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: David Carlier <devnexen@gmail.com>
BridgeAR pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 6, 2020
Whether these APIs should be available for Node.js instances
semantically depends on whether the current Node.js instance
was assigned ownership of process-wide state, and not whether
it refers to the main thread or not.

PR-URL: #31172
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <joyeec9h3@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: David Carlier <devnexen@gmail.com>
BridgeAR mentioned this pull request Jan 7, 2020
addaleax deleted the fix-process-apis-switch branch January 9, 2020 07:52
targos pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 14, 2020
Whether these APIs should be available for Node.js instances
semantically depends on whether the current Node.js instance
was assigned ownership of process-wide state, and not whether
it refers to the main thread or not.

PR-URL: #31172
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <joyeec9h3@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: David Carlier <devnexen@gmail.com>
targos pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 14, 2020
Whether these APIs should be available for Node.js instances
semantically depends on whether the current Node.js instance
was assigned ownership of process-wide state, and not whether
it refers to the main thread or not.

PR-URL: #31172
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <joyeec9h3@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: David Carlier <devnexen@gmail.com>
BethGriggs pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 6, 2020
Whether these APIs should be available for Node.js instances
semantically depends on whether the current Node.js instance
was assigned ownership of process-wide state, and not whether
it refers to the main thread or not.

PR-URL: #31172
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <joyeec9h3@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: David Carlier <devnexen@gmail.com>
MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Feb 8, 2020
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

Labels

author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no outstanding review comments, and a CI started. lib / src Issues and PRs related to general changes in the lib or src directory.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants


Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL