sockets can be undestroyed, confusing documentation #57367

Closed
#65395
Closed
sockets can be undestroyed, confusing documentation#57367
#65395

Description

@rotu
rotu
opened on Mar 7, 2025

Version

v22.14.0

Platform

Microsoft Windows NT 10.0.26100.0 x64

Subsystem

No response

What steps will reproduce the bug?

importnetfrom'node:net';import{once}from'node:events';constsock=newnet.Socket();sock.on('connect',()=>{console.log('socket connected!');});sock.connect({host: 'example.com',port: '80'});awaitonce(sock,'connect');sock.destroy();sock.connect({host: 'example.com',port: '80'});

How often does it reproduce? Is there a required condition?

Reliably. Whether a socket is destroyed by manually calling destroy() or by an error (e.g. ECONNRESET).

What is the expected behavior? Why is that the expected behavior?

The expected behavior is that a socket which is destroyed never can be opened again. This is expected because the documentation says that "no further data can be transferred" after a stream is destroyed, and because both Readable and Writable draw a distinction between the "closed" and "destroyed" properties.

socket.destroy:

Ensures that no more I/O activity happens on this socket. Destroys the stream and closes the connection.

socket.destroyed:

Indicates if the connection is destroyed or not. Once a connection is destroyed no further data can be transferred using it.

What do you see instead?

The socket can be reopened after it is destroyed. The above code prints "socket connected!" twice.

Additional information

I think we're likely stuck with the current behavior, but it should be very prominently documented.

I think this also breaks the semantics of Symbol.asyncDispose, as inherited from the Duplex interface.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions

      , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Add copy buttons to all 
       blocks\n(function() {\n function addCopyButtons() {\n document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {\n if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;\n codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');\n \n var btn = document.createElement('button');\n btn.textContent = 'Copy';\n btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';\n btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };\n btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };\n btn.onclick = function() {\n navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {\n btn.textContent = 'Copied!';\n setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);\n });\n };\n codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';\n codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);\n });\n }\n \n addCopyButtons();\n \n // Re-run on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '

      Skip to content
      sockets can be undestroyed, confusing documentation #57367
      Closed
      #65395
      Closed
      sockets can be undestroyed, confusing documentation#57367
      #65395
      Description
      @rotu
      rotu
      opened on Mar 7, 2025
      Version
      v22.14.0
      Platform
      Microsoft Windows NT 10.0.26100.0 x64

      Subsystem
      No response
      What steps will reproduce the bug?
      importnetfrom'node:net';import{once}from'node:events';constsock=newnet.Socket();sock.on('connect',()=>{console.log('socket connected!');});sock.connect({host: 'example.com',port: '80'});awaitonce(sock,'connect');sock.destroy();sock.connect({host: 'example.com',port: '80'});
      How often does it reproduce? Is there a required condition?
      Reliably. Whether a socket is destroyed by manually calling destroy() or by an error (e.g. ECONNRESET).
      What is the expected behavior? Why is that the expected behavior?
      The expected behavior is that a socket which is destroyed never can be opened again. This is expected because the documentation says that "no further data can be transferred" after a stream is destroyed, and because both Readable and Writable draw a distinction between the "closed" and "destroyed" properties.
      socket.destroy:
      Ensures that no more I/O activity happens on this socket. Destroys the stream and closes the connection.
      socket.destroyed:
      Indicates if the connection is destroyed or not. Once a connection is destroyed no further data can be transferred using it.
      What do you see instead?
      The socket can be reopened after it is destroyed. The above code prints "socket connected!" twice.
      Additional information
      I think we're likely stuck with the current behavior, but it should be very prominently documented.
      I think this also breaks the semantics of Symbol.asyncDispose, as inherited from the Duplex interface.
      Activity
      Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
      Metadata
      Metadata
      Assignees
      No one assigned
        Labels
        No labels
        No labels
        Type
        No type
        Projects
        No projects
          Milestone
          No milestone
          Relationships
          None yet
          Development
          No branches or pull requests
          Issue actions
          
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode\n(function() {\n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '\n .markdown-body {\n color-scheme: dark light;\n }\n .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }\n .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }\n .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }\n .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }\n .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }\n .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }\n ';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n})();", "GitHub Dark Mode README Fix");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

          Skip to content
          sockets can be undestroyed, confusing documentation #57367
          Closed
          #65395
          Closed
          sockets can be undestroyed, confusing documentation#57367
          #65395
          Description
          @rotu
          rotu
          opened on Mar 7, 2025
          Version
          v22.14.0
          Platform
          Microsoft Windows NT 10.0.26100.0 x64

          Subsystem
          No response
          What steps will reproduce the bug?
          importnetfrom'node:net';import{once}from'node:events';constsock=newnet.Socket();sock.on('connect',()=>{console.log('socket connected!');});sock.connect({host: 'example.com',port: '80'});awaitonce(sock,'connect');sock.destroy();sock.connect({host: 'example.com',port: '80'});
          How often does it reproduce? Is there a required condition?
          Reliably. Whether a socket is destroyed by manually calling destroy() or by an error (e.g. ECONNRESET).
          What is the expected behavior? Why is that the expected behavior?
          The expected behavior is that a socket which is destroyed never can be opened again. This is expected because the documentation says that "no further data can be transferred" after a stream is destroyed, and because both Readable and Writable draw a distinction between the "closed" and "destroyed" properties.
          socket.destroy:
          Ensures that no more I/O activity happens on this socket. Destroys the stream and closes the connection.
          socket.destroyed:
          Indicates if the connection is destroyed or not. Once a connection is destroyed no further data can be transferred using it.
          What do you see instead?
          The socket can be reopened after it is destroyed. The above code prints "socket connected!" twice.
          Additional information
          I think we're likely stuck with the current behavior, but it should be very prominently documented.
          I think this also breaks the semantics of Symbol.asyncDispose, as inherited from the Duplex interface.
          Activity
          Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
          Metadata
          Metadata
          Assignees
          No one assigned
            Labels
            No labels
            No labels
            Type
            No type
            Projects
            No projects
              Milestone
              No milestone
              Relationships
              None yet
              Development
              No branches or pull requests
              Issue actions
              
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer\n(function() {\n var ref = document.referrer;\n var terms = [];\n \n if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {\n var url = new URL(ref);\n var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');\n if (q) {\n terms = q.split(/\\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });\n }\n }\n \n if (terms.length === 0) return;\n \n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n \n function highlight(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node\n var text = node.textContent;\n var found = false;\n terms.forEach(function(term) {\n var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\\]\\\\]/g, '\\\\') + ')', 'gi');\n if (regex.test(text)) {\n found = true;\n var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();\n var parts = text.split(regex);\n parts.forEach(function(part, i) {\n if (i % 2 === 0) {\n frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));\n } else {\n var span = document.createElement('span');\n span.className = 'userscript-highlight';\n span.textContent = part;\n frag.appendChild(span);\n }\n });\n node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);\n }\n });\n } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element\n var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];\n if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {\n Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);\n }\n }\n }\n \n highlight(document.body);\n \n // Re-highlight on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Highlight Search Terms");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

              Skip to content
              sockets can be undestroyed, confusing documentation #57367
              Closed
              #65395
              Closed
              sockets can be undestroyed, confusing documentation#57367
              #65395
              Description
              @rotu
              rotu
              opened on Mar 7, 2025
              Version
              v22.14.0
              Platform
              Microsoft Windows NT 10.0.26100.0 x64

              Subsystem
              No response
              What steps will reproduce the bug?
              importnetfrom'node:net';import{once}from'node:events';constsock=newnet.Socket();sock.on('connect',()=>{console.log('socket connected!');});sock.connect({host: 'example.com',port: '80'});awaitonce(sock,'connect');sock.destroy();sock.connect({host: 'example.com',port: '80'});
              How often does it reproduce? Is there a required condition?
              Reliably. Whether a socket is destroyed by manually calling destroy() or by an error (e.g. ECONNRESET).
              What is the expected behavior? Why is that the expected behavior?
              The expected behavior is that a socket which is destroyed never can be opened again. This is expected because the documentation says that "no further data can be transferred" after a stream is destroyed, and because both Readable and Writable draw a distinction between the "closed" and "destroyed" properties.
              socket.destroy:
              Ensures that no more I/O activity happens on this socket. Destroys the stream and closes the connection.
              socket.destroyed:
              Indicates if the connection is destroyed or not. Once a connection is destroyed no further data can be transferred using it.
              What do you see instead?
              The socket can be reopened after it is destroyed. The above code prints "socket connected!" twice.
              Additional information
              I think we're likely stuck with the current behavior, but it should be very prominently documented.
              I think this also breaks the semantics of Symbol.asyncDispose, as inherited from the Duplex interface.
              Activity
              Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
              Metadata
              Metadata
              Assignees
              No one assigned
                Labels
                No labels
                No labels
                Type
                No type
                Projects
                No projects
                  Milestone
                  No milestone
                  Relationships
                  None yet
                  Development
                  No branches or pull requests
                  Issue actions
                  
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page\n(function() {\n var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',\n 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',\n 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];\n \n function cleanUrl(url) {\n try {\n var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);\n var changed = false;\n trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {\n if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {\n u.searchParams.delete(p);\n changed = true;\n }\n });\n return changed ? u.toString() : url;\n } catch (e) {\n return url;\n }\n }\n \n function cleanLinks() {\n document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n \n cleanLinks();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1) {\n if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();\n node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Remove Tracking Parameters from Links");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '

                  Skip to content
                  sockets can be undestroyed, confusing documentation #57367
                  Closed
                  #65395
                  Closed
                  sockets can be undestroyed, confusing documentation#57367
                  #65395
                  Description
                  @rotu
                  rotu
                  opened on Mar 7, 2025
                  Version
                  v22.14.0
                  Platform
                  Microsoft Windows NT 10.0.26100.0 x64

                  Subsystem
                  No response
                  What steps will reproduce the bug?
                  importnetfrom'node:net';import{once}from'node:events';constsock=newnet.Socket();sock.on('connect',()=>{console.log('socket connected!');});sock.connect({host: 'example.com',port: '80'});awaitonce(sock,'connect');sock.destroy();sock.connect({host: 'example.com',port: '80'});
                  How often does it reproduce? Is there a required condition?
                  Reliably. Whether a socket is destroyed by manually calling destroy() or by an error (e.g. ECONNRESET).
                  What is the expected behavior? Why is that the expected behavior?
                  The expected behavior is that a socket which is destroyed never can be opened again. This is expected because the documentation says that "no further data can be transferred" after a stream is destroyed, and because both Readable and Writable draw a distinction between the "closed" and "destroyed" properties.
                  socket.destroy:
                  Ensures that no more I/O activity happens on this socket. Destroys the stream and closes the connection.
                  socket.destroyed:
                  Indicates if the connection is destroyed or not. Once a connection is destroyed no further data can be transferred using it.
                  What do you see instead?
                  The socket can be reopened after it is destroyed. The above code prints "socket connected!" twice.
                  Additional information
                  I think we're likely stuck with the current behavior, but it should be very prominently documented.
                  I think this also breaks the semantics of Symbol.asyncDispose, as inherited from the Duplex interface.
                  Activity
                  Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
                  Metadata
                  Metadata
                  Assignees
                  No one assigned
                    Labels
                    No labels
                    No labels
                    Type
                    No type
                    Projects
                    No projects
                      Milestone
                      No milestone
                      Relationships
                      None yet
                      Development
                      No branches or pull requests
                      Issue actions
                      
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube\n(function() {\n function tryTheater() {\n var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label=\"Theater mode\"], ytd-player #player button[title=\"Theater mode\"]');\n if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {\n btn.click();\n }\n }\n \n // Try immediately\n tryTheater();\n \n // Try after navigation (SPA)\n var lastUrl = location.href;\n setInterval(function() {\n if (location.href !== lastUrl) {\n lastUrl = location.href;\n setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);\n }\n }, 1000);\n \n // Also try on player load\n var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "YouTube Theater Mode Default");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

                      Skip to content
                      sockets can be undestroyed, confusing documentation #57367
                      Closed
                      #65395
                      Closed
                      sockets can be undestroyed, confusing documentation#57367
                      #65395
                      Description
                      @rotu
                      rotu
                      opened on Mar 7, 2025
                      Version
                      v22.14.0
                      Platform
                      Microsoft Windows NT 10.0.26100.0 x64

                      Subsystem
                      No response
                      What steps will reproduce the bug?
                      importnetfrom'node:net';import{once}from'node:events';constsock=newnet.Socket();sock.on('connect',()=>{console.log('socket connected!');});sock.connect({host: 'example.com',port: '80'});awaitonce(sock,'connect');sock.destroy();sock.connect({host: 'example.com',port: '80'});
                      How often does it reproduce? Is there a required condition?
                      Reliably. Whether a socket is destroyed by manually calling destroy() or by an error (e.g. ECONNRESET).
                      What is the expected behavior? Why is that the expected behavior?
                      The expected behavior is that a socket which is destroyed never can be opened again. This is expected because the documentation says that "no further data can be transferred" after a stream is destroyed, and because both Readable and Writable draw a distinction between the "closed" and "destroyed" properties.
                      socket.destroy:
                      Ensures that no more I/O activity happens on this socket. Destroys the stream and closes the connection.
                      socket.destroyed:
                      Indicates if the connection is destroyed or not. Once a connection is destroyed no further data can be transferred using it.
                      What do you see instead?
                      The socket can be reopened after it is destroyed. The above code prints "socket connected!" twice.
                      Additional information
                      I think we're likely stuck with the current behavior, but it should be very prominently documented.
                      I think this also breaks the semantics of Symbol.asyncDispose, as inherited from the Duplex interface.
                      Activity
                      Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
                      Metadata
                      Metadata
                      Assignees
                      No one assigned
                        Labels
                        No labels
                        No labels
                        Type
                        No type
                        Projects
                        No projects
                          Milestone
                          No milestone
                          Relationships
                          None yet
                          Development
                          No branches or pull requests
                          Issue actions
                          
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content\n(function() {\n function unstick() {\n document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role=\"banner\"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*=\"position: fixed\"], [style*=\"position:sticky\"]').forEach(function(el) {\n if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || \n getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {\n el.style.position = 'static';\n el.style.top = 'auto';\n el.style.zIndex = 'auto';\n }\n });\n }\n \n unstick();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });\n})();", "Kill Sticky Headers");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

                          Skip to content
                          sockets can be undestroyed, confusing documentation #57367
                          Closed
                          #65395
                          Closed
                          sockets can be undestroyed, confusing documentation#57367
                          #65395
                          Description
                          @rotu
                          rotu
                          opened on Mar 7, 2025
                          Version
                          v22.14.0
                          Platform
                          Microsoft Windows NT 10.0.26100.0 x64

                          Subsystem
                          No response
                          What steps will reproduce the bug?
                          importnetfrom'node:net';import{once}from'node:events';constsock=newnet.Socket();sock.on('connect',()=>{console.log('socket connected!');});sock.connect({host: 'example.com',port: '80'});awaitonce(sock,'connect');sock.destroy();sock.connect({host: 'example.com',port: '80'});
                          How often does it reproduce? Is there a required condition?
                          Reliably. Whether a socket is destroyed by manually calling destroy() or by an error (e.g. ECONNRESET).
                          What is the expected behavior? Why is that the expected behavior?
                          The expected behavior is that a socket which is destroyed never can be opened again. This is expected because the documentation says that "no further data can be transferred" after a stream is destroyed, and because both Readable and Writable draw a distinction between the "closed" and "destroyed" properties.
                          socket.destroy:
                          Ensures that no more I/O activity happens on this socket. Destroys the stream and closes the connection.
                          socket.destroyed:
                          Indicates if the connection is destroyed or not. Once a connection is destroyed no further data can be transferred using it.
                          What do you see instead?
                          The socket can be reopened after it is destroyed. The above code prints "socket connected!" twice.
                          Additional information
                          I think we're likely stuck with the current behavior, but it should be very prominently documented.
                          I think this also breaks the semantics of Symbol.asyncDispose, as inherited from the Duplex interface.
                          Activity
                          Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
                          Metadata
                          Metadata
                          Assignees
                          No one assigned
                            Labels
                            No labels
                            No labels
                            Type
                            No type
                            Projects
                            No projects
                              Milestone
                              No milestone
                              Relationships
                              None yet
                              Development
                              No branches or pull requests
                              Issue actions
                              
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site\n(function() {\n var enabled = true;\n \n function applyDarkMode() {\n if (!enabled) return;\n \n // Create style element if it doesn't exist\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (!style) {\n style = document.createElement('style');\n style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n }\n \n // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video\n style.textContent = '\n /* Invert everything except media */\n html {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #1a1a2e !important;\n }\n \n /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */\n img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*=\"background-image\"] {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n }\n \n /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */\n .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,\n [data-theme=\"light\"], [data-theme=\"light\"],\n .ace_editor, .ace_editor *,\n .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,\n .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,\n .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,\n .highlight, .highlight *,\n pre code, pre code * {\n filter: none !important;\n }\n \n /* Fix common UI elements */\n .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #2d2d44 !important;\n border-color: #444 !important;\n }\n \n /* Scrollbars */\n ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }\n \n /* Selection */\n ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ';\n }\n \n function removeDarkMode() {\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (style) style.remove();\n }\n \n // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D\n document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {\n if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {\n e.preventDefault();\n enabled = !enabled;\n if (enabled) {\n applyDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');\n } else {\n removeDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');\n }\n }\n });\n \n // Apply on load\n applyDarkMode();\n \n // Re-apply on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {\n applyDarkMode();\n }\n });\n observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });\n \n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');\n})();", "Universal Dark Mode");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); }
})();
})();

                              Skip to content
                              sockets can be undestroyed, confusing documentation #57367
                              Closed
                              #65395
                              Closed
                              sockets can be undestroyed, confusing documentation#57367
                              #65395
                              Description
                              @rotu
                              rotu
                              opened on Mar 7, 2025
                              Version
                              v22.14.0
                              Platform
                              Microsoft Windows NT 10.0.26100.0 x64

                              Subsystem
                              No response
                              What steps will reproduce the bug?
                              importnetfrom'node:net';import{once}from'node:events';constsock=newnet.Socket();sock.on('connect',()=>{console.log('socket connected!');});sock.connect({host: 'example.com',port: '80'});awaitonce(sock,'connect');sock.destroy();sock.connect({host: 'example.com',port: '80'});
                              How often does it reproduce? Is there a required condition?
                              Reliably. Whether a socket is destroyed by manually calling destroy() or by an error (e.g. ECONNRESET).
                              What is the expected behavior? Why is that the expected behavior?
                              The expected behavior is that a socket which is destroyed never can be opened again. This is expected because the documentation says that "no further data can be transferred" after a stream is destroyed, and because both Readable and Writable draw a distinction between the "closed" and "destroyed" properties.
                              socket.destroy:
                              Ensures that no more I/O activity happens on this socket. Destroys the stream and closes the connection.
                              socket.destroyed:
                              Indicates if the connection is destroyed or not. Once a connection is destroyed no further data can be transferred using it.
                              What do you see instead?
                              The socket can be reopened after it is destroyed. The above code prints "socket connected!" twice.
                              Additional information
                              I think we're likely stuck with the current behavior, but it should be very prominently documented.
                              I think this also breaks the semantics of Symbol.asyncDispose, as inherited from the Duplex interface.
                              Activity
                              Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
                              Metadata
                              Metadata
                              Assignees
                              No one assigned
                                Labels
                                No labels
                                No labels
                                Type
                                No type
                                Projects
                                No projects
                                  Milestone
                                  No milestone
                                  Relationships
                                  None yet
                                  Development
                                  No branches or pull requests
                                  Issue actions