doc: add Buffer.lastIndexOf

[dcposch]

Complements #4604

Together they fix#4846

[tflanagan]

Can you order this alphabetically like the rest?

[dcposch]

@tflanagan fixed

[tflanagan]

@dcposch, thanks :)

[Qard]

Also, it'd be good to expand the parameter bits to be in-line with this other buffers PR: #4873

[dcposch]

@Qard fixed

[TimothyGu]

UTF**-**8

[TimothyGu]

Also you should need to mention the default encoding at all since it is listed above.

[dcposch]

It's rendered "UTF8" everywhere else in this file. I think this is fine.

[dcposch]

@Qard looks more dece now?

[Qard]

Can you wrap each type separately, please?

[dcposch]

It's done like this everywhere else in the file -- eg indexOf, includes, and fill

I can change all of those places if you want--LMK

[dcposch]

@Qard added a commit that wraps types separately everywhere there's a list

[TimothyGu]

Unfortunately wrapping the three separately confuses the JSON documentation generation IIRC.

[jasnell]

LGTM

[dcposch]

@jasnell thanks for taking a look! Someone else will have to merge it for me, ideally at the same time as #4846 once that is ready.

[tflanagan]

Could you please add

constBuffer=require('buffer').Buffer;

[targos]

Is it needed for the linter ? Buffer is global.

[tflanagan]

The linter does complain about it

[dcposch]

@tflanagan no other code sample in this doc does that

which linter are you talking about? make test and make doc both run without errors

[dcposch]

@jasnell thanks for the review.

i just rebased because there were conflicts. the PR is even smaller now -- it only adds the Buffer.lastIndexOf section to the docs and doesn't modify any existing sections

[dcposch]

@jasnell@Qard let me know if the docs look good now.

I think the code part ( #4846 ) is ready to go.

[jasnell]

LGTM

[jasnell]

how does this relate to #4846?

[dcposch]

@jasnell#4646 adds a new feature. This PR adds the corresponding docs.

[jasnell]

That's what I figured... any reason not to simply bundle the two commits into the single PR #4846? Would make it easier to land.

[Qard]

Agreed, it's better that docs commits of new features are included in the PR of the feature itself and just mention @nodejs/documentation in the issue to summon us docs folks for review.

[dcposch]

@Qard done. Moved to #4846