| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Avoid the type-checking util.* functions in node core code.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks and done
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just a nit, but checking directly against undefined (req.headers.expect !== undefined) instead of using typeof is preferred, when compared to the rest of the code base.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I appreciate the nit picks :-) should be fixed now
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also while we're in here, EventEmitter.listenerCount() is deprecated, so we should just use self.listenerCount('checkContinue'); instead and similarly for the other event below.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@mscdex There is one other use of the EventEmitter.listenerCount in the file. Should I update it as well, or just change it in this new code?
Not sure how tightly scoped y'all like to keep the PRs.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure, I think that should be ok.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we generally try to avoid explicitly calling process.exit() in tests. Could you instead just close the server (which should make the process exit on it's own)?
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Marking semver-minor due to the addition of the new event |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Generally LGTM but @evanlucas is correct about not calling process.exit() in the test. Once that's resolved this looks good. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
I'll try and get that knocked out this evening or tomorrow morning. Thanks for the feedback |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
This should be ready to rock and roll now. Tests have been rewritten to use server.close() and are more complete now :-) |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@designfrontier the linter is complaining.... looks like const EventEmitter = require('events'); needs to be removed from lib/_http_server.js now that it's no longer being used. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Now returns a 417 error status or allows for an event listener on the `checkExpectation` event. Before we were ignoring requests that had misspelled `100-continue` values for expect headers. This is a quick port of the work done here: nodejs/node-v0.x-archive#7132 by alFReD-NSH with surrounding discussion here: nodejs/node-v0.x-archive#4651 Also updates all the instances of the deprecated EventEmitter.listenerCount to the current self.listenerCount. Most of these were in the new code ported over but there was another legacy instance. Refs: nodejs#2403
|
whoops eslint was acting up for me in sublime apparently. Fixed. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
I think the other CI test failure is unrelated, but here goes again: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/1166/ |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Looks like it passed jenkins... anything else I need to do on this? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
LGTM @nodejs/http |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Seems OK |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Now returns a 417 error status or allows for an event listener on the `checkExpectation` event. Before we were ignoring requests that had misspelled `100-continue` values for expect headers. This is a quick port of the work done here: nodejs/node-v0.x-archive#7132 by alFReD-NSH with surrounding discussion here: nodejs/node-v0.x-archive#4651 Also updates all the instances of the deprecated EventEmitter.listenerCount to the current self.listenerCount. Most of these were in the new code ported over but there was another legacy instance. Refs: #2403 PR-URL: #4501 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
|
Nice work @designfrontier! I believe this is your first commit in to core, if so, welcome on board! I hope you stick around and find other ways to contribute. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
It is! I plan to stick around and keep grabbing ticket when I have spare
|
Sorry, something went wrong.
Now returns a 417 error status or allows for an event listener on the `checkExpectation` event. Before we were ignoring requests that had misspelled `100-continue` values for expect headers. This is a quick port of the work done here: nodejs/node-v0.x-archive#7132 by alFReD-NSH with surrounding discussion here: nodejs/node-v0.x-archive#4651 Also updates all the instances of the deprecated EventEmitter.listenerCount to the current self.listenerCount. Most of these were in the new code ported over but there was another legacy instance. Refs: #2403 PR-URL: #4501 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Notable changes: * events: make sure console functions exist (Dave) #4479 * fs: add autoClose option to fs.createWriteStream (Saquib) #3679 * http: improves expect header handling (Daniel Sellers) #4501 * node: allow preload modules with -i (Evan Lucas) #4696 * v8,src: expose statistics about heap spaces (`v8.getHeapSpaceStatistics()`) (Ben Ripkens) #4463 * Minor performance improvements: - lib: Use arrow functions instead of bind where possible (Minwoo Jung) #3622 - module: cache stat() results more aggressively (Ben Noordhuis) #4575 - querystring: improve parse() performance (Brian White) #4675 PR-URL: #4742
Notable changes: * events: make sure console functions exist (Dave) #4479 * fs: add autoClose option to fs.createWriteStream (Saquib) #3679 * http: improves expect header handling (Daniel Sellers) #4501 * node: allow preload modules with -i (Evan Lucas) #4696 * v8,src: expose statistics about heap spaces (`v8.getHeapSpaceStatistics()`) (Ben Ripkens) #4463 * Minor performance improvements: - lib: Use arrow functions instead of bind where possible (Minwoo Jung) #3622 - module: cache stat() results more aggressively (Ben Noordhuis) #4575 - querystring: improve parse() performance (Brian White) #4675 PR-URL: #4742
In Node v5.5.0, the HTTP server became more diligent about sending a HTTP 417 Expectation Failed response if the `Expect` header was not `100-continue`. Since `RequestHelper.httpOptions` was creating requests with an empty `Expect` header, and did not define a `checkExpectation` event handler, the server returned 417 errors for these requests. Also updated `RequestHelper.sendRequest` to use the status code text as the error message if the error response body is empty. https://nodejs.org/en/blog/release/v5.5.0/ nodejs/node#4501 https://nodejs.org/api/http.html#http_event_checkexpectation https://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html#sec10.4.18 https://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec14.html#sec14.20 https://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec8.html#sec8.2.3
In Node v5.5.0, the HTTP server became more diligent about sending a HTTP 417 Expectation Failed response if the `Expect` header was not `100-continue`. Since `RequestHelper.httpOptions` was creating requests with an empty `Expect` header, and did not define a `checkExpectation` event handler, the server returned 417 errors for these requests. Also updated `RequestHelper.sendRequest` to use the status code text as the error message if the error response body is empty. https://nodejs.org/en/blog/release/v5.5.0/ nodejs/node#4501 https://nodejs.org/api/http.html#http_event_checkexpectation https://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html#sec10.4.18 https://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec14.html#sec14.20 https://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec8.html#sec8.2.3
Now returns a 417 error status or allows for an event listener on the `checkExpectation` event. Before we were ignoring requests that had misspelled `100-continue` values for expect headers. This is a quick port of the work done here: nodejs/node-v0.x-archive#7132 by alFReD-NSH with surrounding discussion here: nodejs/node-v0.x-archive#4651 Also updates all the instances of the deprecated EventEmitter.listenerCount to the current self.listenerCount. Most of these were in the new code ported over but there was another legacy instance. Refs: nodejs#2403 PR-URL: nodejs#4501 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Notable changes: * events: make sure console functions exist (Dave) nodejs#4479 * fs: add autoClose option to fs.createWriteStream (Saquib) nodejs#3679 * http: improves expect header handling (Daniel Sellers) nodejs#4501 * node: allow preload modules with -i (Evan Lucas) nodejs#4696 * v8,src: expose statistics about heap spaces (`v8.getHeapSpaceStatistics()`) (Ben Ripkens) nodejs#4463 * Minor performance improvements: - lib: Use arrow functions instead of bind where possible (Minwoo Jung) nodejs#3622 - module: cache stat() results more aggressively (Ben Noordhuis) nodejs#4575 - querystring: improve parse() performance (Brian White) nodejs#4675 PR-URL: nodejs#4742
…t "Expect" header usage Many MPU tests were setting "Expect: application/json", a presumed accidental misspelling of the "Accept" header. The only valid value for the "Expect" header is "100-continue". Old muskie was using node 0.10. Sometime after 0.10 nodejs/node#4501 changed node behaviour to respond with 417 Expectation Failed if given a bogus "Expect" header.
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
Now returns a 417 error status or allows for an event listener on
the checkExpectation event. Before we were ignoring requests that
had misspelled 100-continue values for expect headers.
This is a quick port of the work done here:
nodejs/node-v0.x-archive#7132 by alFReD-NSH
with surrounding discussion here:
nodejs/node-v0.x-archive#4651
Refs: #2403