doc: clarify http error events after calling destroy() - #46903
Conversation
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Review requested:
|
Sorry, something went wrong.
| Passing an `AbortSignal` and then calling `abort()` on the corresponding | ||
| `AbortController` will behave the same way as calling `.destroy()` on the | ||
| request itself. | ||
| request. Specifically, the `'error'` event will be emitted with an error with |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit
| request. Specifically, the `'error'` event will be emitted with an error with | |
| request itself. Specifically, the `'error'` event will be emitted with an error with |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Was going for brevity. "Itself" doesn't seem to add clarity. What do you think?
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I dont think its a necessary change to this pr, Id leave it as it was previously
Sorry, something went wrong.
| request. Specifically, the `'error'` event will be emitted with an error with | ||
| the message `'AbortError: The operation was aborted'`, the code `'ABORT_ERR'` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| request. Specifically, the `'error'` event will be emitted with an error with | |
| the message `'AbortError: The operation was aborted'`, the code `'ABORT_ERR'` | |
| request. Specifically, the `'error'` event will be emitted with the message `'AbortError: The operation was aborted'`, the code `'ABORT_ERR'` |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This parallels the wording in the bullet points above and makes it clear that the argument is an Error and not a string.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It sounds a bit reduntant to me, feel free to ignore
Sorry, something went wrong.
mcollina
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
lgtm
Sorry, something went wrong.
PR-URL: #46903 Reviewed-By: Paolo Insogna <paolo@cowtech.it> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
PR-URL: #46903 Reviewed-By: Paolo Insogna <paolo@cowtech.it> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
PR-URL: #46903 Reviewed-By: Paolo Insogna <paolo@cowtech.it> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
PR-URL: #46903 Reviewed-By: Paolo Insogna <paolo@cowtech.it> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
Clarifies the errors after calling destroy(), as well as aborting a passed AbortController.
Aside, the statement "Passing an AbortSignal and then calling abort() on the corresponding AbortController will behave the same way as calling .destroy()" appears correct for Node.js v19, but incorrect for Node.js v16 (didn't test versions between those). Specifically, calling controller.abort() after the 'response' event has no effect in v16.