| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
and here's some proof (kinda) that it actually works (reasonably): #6381 (comment) |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Can you please add some explanation in the commit message about why would be reverted. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Thank you. CI is green. LGTM but want @bnoordhuis and @trevnorris to sign off as well. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
ping @bnoordhuis & @trevnorris |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Quick LGTM. Can we rename them now to hasRef() and HasRef() in a follow-up PR? :-) |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@bnoordhuis I may as well do that in a second commit here then.. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
updated ptal.. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
2nd commit LGTM2. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
attempting to ping @trevnorris again |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
LGTM. Second commit enough to warrant another CI run? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@trevnorris Yeah good call: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/2593/ |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
CI is green, landing. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
This reverts commit 9bb5a5e. This API is not suitable because it depended on being able to potentially access the handle's flag after the handle was already cleaned up. Since this is not actually possible (obviously, oops) this newer API no longer makes much sense, and the older API is more suitable. API comparison: IsRefed -> Has a strong reference AND is alive. (Deterministic) Unrefed -> Has a weak reference OR is dead. (Less deterministic) Refs: nodejs#6395 Refs: nodejs#6204 Refs: nodejs#6401 Refs: nodejs#6382 Fixes: nodejs#6381 PR-URL: nodejs#6546 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: Trevor Norris <trev.norris@gmail.com> Conflicts: src/handle_wrap.cc test/parallel/test-handle-wrap-isrefed-tty.js test/parallel/test-handle-wrap-isrefed.js
Rename slightly to HasRef() at bnoordhuis’ request. Better reflects what we actually do for this check. Refs: nodejs#6395 Refs: nodejs#6204 Refs: nodejs#6401 Refs: nodejs#6382 Refs: nodejs#6381 PR-URL: nodejs#6546 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: Trevor Norris <trev.norris@gmail.com>
|
For posterity, landing this requires this commit chain:
|
Sorry, something went wrong.
This reverts commit 9bb5a5e. This API is not suitable because it depended on being able to potentially access the handle's flag after the handle was already cleaned up. Since this is not actually possible (obviously, oops) this newer API no longer makes much sense, and the older API is more suitable. API comparison: IsRefed -> Has a strong reference AND is alive. (Deterministic) Unrefed -> Has a weak reference OR is dead. (Less deterministic) Refs: #6395 Refs: #6204 Refs: #6401 Refs: #6382 Fixes: #6381 PR-URL: #6546 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: Trevor Norris <trev.norris@gmail.com> Conflicts: src/handle_wrap.cc test/parallel/test-handle-wrap-isrefed-tty.js test/parallel/test-handle-wrap-isrefed.js
|
@Fishrock123 Added dont-land label. please feel free to make a change if that was incorrect |
Sorry, something went wrong.
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
Checklist
Affected core subsystem(s)
handle_wrap
Description of change
This reverts commit 9bb5a5e.
Refs: #6395
Refs: #6204
Refs: #6401
Refs: #6382
Fixes: #6381
Conflicts:
src/handle_wrap.cc
test/parallel/test-handle-wrap-isrefed-tty.js
test/parallel/test-handle-wrap-isrefed.js
My own stupidity for changing this. cc @bnoordhuis, @jasnell, @trevnorris so this can hopefully be landed properly into a release. (Hopefully this week?..)