src: port `initializeImportMeta` to native by aduh95 · Pull Request #57286 · nodejs/node

aduh95 · 2025-03-03T09:51:47Z

Supersedes #57003.

We should probably avoid translating the URL to a path twice when the user needs both dirname and filename, but I'm not sure if there's an elegant way to do it without crossing the C++/JS bundary.

nodejs-github-bot · 2025-03-03T09:51:52Z

Review requested:

@nodejs/loaders

codecov · 2025-03-03T11:11:48Z

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 68.42105% with 18 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 90.26%. Comparing base (9cc0195) to head (6b10319).
Report is 366 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/node_modules.cc	64.00%	6 Missing and 12 partials ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #57286 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 90.28% 90.26% -0.02% 
==========================================
Files 630 630 Lines 186158 186208 +50 Branches 36484 36488 +4 ==========================================
+ Hits 168067 168077 +10 - Misses 10974 10987 +13 - Partials 7117 7144 +27

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
lib/internal/modules/esm/initialize_import_meta.js	`100.00% <100.00%> (ø)`
src/node_modules.cc	`77.30% <64.00%> (-1.44%)`	⬇️

... and 29 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

JakobJingleheimer

I'm not great with cpp, but it looks fine AFAICT, and conceptually checks out 🙂

jsumners-nr

I think the original implementation is much easier to understand and maintain.

aduh95 · 2025-03-06T08:56:20Z

I think the original implementation is much easier to understand and maintain.

Do you have any suggestions on how to improve it?

jsumners-nr · 2025-03-10T11:51:47Z

I think the original implementation is much easier to understand and maintain.
Do you have any suggestions on how to improve it?

Not with it all being in C++. The original was plain JavaScript that only required JavaScript domain knowledge. This PR shifts it all in to C++, thus requiring the reader to know that language along with all of the underlying APIs used to implement the feature.

nodejs-github-bot · 2025-03-10T15:42:50Z

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/65676/
Benchmark CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js%20benchmark/job/benchmark-node-micro-benchmarks/1677/

Results

esm/cjs-parse.js n=100 -0.20 % ±0.89%
esm/detect-esm-syntax.js n=10000 type='with-package-json' 0.41 % ±0.99%
esm/detect-esm-syntax.js n=10000 type='without-package-json' 0.25 % ±0.79%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/non-exist' packageConfigMain='./index.js' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 0.12 % ±0.76%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/non-exist' packageConfigMain='' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 *** 1.44 % ±0.66%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.js' packageConfigMain='./index.js' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 *** 1.35 % ±0.56%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.js' packageConfigMain='' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 ** 0.59 % ±0.43%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.json' packageConfigMain='./index.js' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 0.76 % ±0.86%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.json' packageConfigMain='' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 0.57 % ±0.58%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.node' packageConfigMain='./index.js' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 ** 0.89 % ±0.52%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.node' packageConfigMain='' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 *** 1.25 % ±0.71%
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='./relative-existing.js' n=1000 1.15 % ±2.06%
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='./relative-nonexistent.js' n=1000 0.02 % ±1.16%
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='node:os' n=1000 -0.80 % ±3.99%
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='node:prefixed-nonexistent' n=1000 -1.62 % ±4.91%
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='unprefixed-existing' n=1000 0.47 % ±1.24%
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='unprefixed-nonexistent' n=1000 ** 1.11 % ±0.68%
esm/esm-loader-import.js specifier='./relative-existing.js' n=1000 1.86 % ±4.63%
esm/esm-loader-import.js specifier='./relative-nonexistent.js' n=1000 0.82 % ±1.10%
esm/esm-loader-import.js specifier='data:text/javascript,{i}' n=1000 -1.30 % ±1.70%
esm/esm-loader-import.js specifier='node:os' n=1000 -1.84 % ±3.60%
esm/esm-loader-import.js specifier='node:prefixed-nonexistent' n=1000 1.61 % ±4.81%
esm/import-meta.js n=1000 *** -5.10 % ±0.61%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='default' type='access' -1.44 % ±1.49%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='default' type='all' *** -1.72 % ±0.62%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='default' type='load' * -0.64 % ±0.51%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='named' type='access' 1.15 % ±1.81%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='named' type='all' *** -1.53 % ±0.57%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='named' type='load' ** -0.91 % ±0.58%

aduh95 · 2025-03-13T15:36:57Z

Banchmark CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js%20benchmark/job/benchmark-node-micro-benchmarks/1680/

Results

confidence improvement accuracy (*)
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='node:os' n=1000 * -3.36 % ±2.64%
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='node:prefixed-nonexistent' n=1000 * -4.92 % ±3.88%
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='unprefixed-existing' n=1000 ** -1.88 % ±1.37%
esm/esm-loader-import.js specifier='data:text/javascript,{i}' n=1000 * 1.51 % ±1.27%
esm/import-meta.js n=1000 *** -4.65 % ±0.53%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='default' type='access' * -1.65 % ±1.50%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='default' type='load' *** -1.86 % ±0.62%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='named' type='all' *** -1.59 % ±0.59%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='named' type='load' *** -1.29 % ±0.51%

aduh95 · 2025-03-13T15:59:48Z

Benchmark CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js%20benchmark/job/benchmark-node-micro-benchmarks/1682/

Results

confidence improvement accuracy (*)
esm/cjs-parse.js n=100 1.09 % ±1.13%
esm/detect-esm-syntax.js n=10000 type='with-package-json' -0.44 % ±0.85%
esm/detect-esm-syntax.js n=10000 type='without-package-json' 0.63 % ±0.74%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/non-exist' packageConfigMain='./index.js' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 ** 1.05 % ±0.68%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/non-exist' packageConfigMain='' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 0.31 % ±0.72%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.js' packageConfigMain='./index.js' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 0.62 % ±0.64%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.js' packageConfigMain='' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 0.45 % ±0.46%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.json' packageConfigMain='./index.js' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 0.39 % ±0.76%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.json' packageConfigMain='' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 0.37 % ±0.64%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.node' packageConfigMain='./index.js' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 0.65 % ±0.72%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.node' packageConfigMain='' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 *** 1.02 % ±0.46%
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='./relative-existing.js' n=1000 * -1.57 % ±1.42%
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='./relative-nonexistent.js' n=1000 -0.08 % ±1.70%
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='node:os' n=1000 -0.26 % ±2.28%
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='node:prefixed-nonexistent' n=1000 -1.75 % ±3.87%
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='unprefixed-existing' n=1000 1.20 % ±1.25%
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='unprefixed-nonexistent' n=1000 0.48 % ±0.87%
esm/esm-loader-import.js specifier='./relative-existing.js' n=1000 -1.16 % ±3.86%
esm/esm-loader-import.js specifier='./relative-nonexistent.js' n=1000 -0.48 % ±0.72%
esm/esm-loader-import.js specifier='data:text/javascript,{i}' n=1000 -0.41 % ±1.82%
esm/esm-loader-import.js specifier='node:os' n=1000 -1.91 % ±3.28%
esm/esm-loader-import.js specifier='node:prefixed-nonexistent' n=1000 0.33 % ±3.81%
esm/import-meta.js n=1000 *** -5.62 % ±0.69%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='default' type='access' ** -2.03 % ±1.45%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='default' type='all' *** -1.31 % ±0.62%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='default' type='load' *** -1.50 % ±0.70%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='named' type='access' -0.42 % ±1.68%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='named' type='all' *** -1.19 % ±0.49%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='named' type='load' *** -1.06 % ±0.46%

It's not any better, reverting

nodejs-github-bot · 2025-03-13T16:22:48Z

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/65721/

jasnell · 2025-03-13T16:39:08Z

Nit: remove the v8:: qualifier and add v8::PropertyCallbackInfo to the using section at the top if it is not already there.

jasnell · 2025-03-13T17:42:41Z

Setting Data to a single internal object that has both dirname and filename set on it the first time either is accessed on it should work, yes?

jasnell · 2025-03-13T17:44:59Z

Nit: can these please avoid the use of Check() and propagate errors up correctly?

jsumners-nr · 2025-03-13T19:14:50Z

Banchmark CI: ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js%20benchmark/job/benchmark-node-micro-benchmarks/1680
Results

confidence improvement accuracy (*)
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='node:os' n=1000 * -3.36 % ±2.64%
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='node:prefixed-nonexistent' n=1000 * -4.92 % ±3.88%
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='unprefixed-existing' n=1000 ** -1.88 % ±1.37%
esm/esm-loader-import.js specifier='data:text/javascript,{i}' n=1000 * 1.51 % ±1.27%
esm/import-meta.js n=1000 *** -4.65 % ±0.53%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='default' type='access' * -1.65 % ±1.50%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='default' type='load' *** -1.86 % ±0.62%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='named' type='all' *** -1.59 % ±0.59%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='named' type='load' *** -1.29 % ±0.51%

The actual benchmarks site is asking for a login. How do we interpret this snippet?

jasnell · 2025-03-13T20:28:38Z

hmm... looking at the benchmark results there it's just not clear to me that moving the init to native code has enough realized benefit. Moving into native does make the code a bit more difficult to maintain while also being slight slower. A lazy getter defined in JavaScript could likely achieve the same result while being easier for more people to help maintain. Not going to block on it tho... just not seeing the full benefit.

aduh95 · 2025-03-13T20:59:47Z

A lazy getter defined in JavaScript could likely achieve the same result while being easier for more people to help maintain

It's unclear whether a JS getter would be spec compliant, see the discussion in #57003 – that being said, I'm also a bit puzzled by the benchmark results

JakobJingleheimer · 2025-03-30T07:51:56Z

What you've done here is pretty cool. But if the c++ implementation isn't faster, and we can stay spec compliant (which that discussion seemed to end that it is), I think the JS implementation would be better because it's more maintainable.

aduh95 · 2025-04-25T14:28:43Z

Benchmark CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js%20benchmark/job/benchmark-node-micro-benchmarks/1697/

Results

confidence improvement accuracy (*)
esm/detect-esm-syntax.js n=10000 type='without-package-json' *** -1.43 % ±0.76%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/non-exist' packageConfigMain='' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 ** 0.70 % ±0.42%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.js' packageConfigMain='' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 *** 0.80 % ±0.33%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.json' packageConfigMain='./index.js' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 ** 1.02 % ±0.60%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.json' packageConfigMain='' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 *** 1.08 % ±0.60%
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='node:os' n=1000 * 3.20 % ±3.07%
esm/import-meta.js n=1000 *** -7.21 % ±0.71%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='default' type='access' ** 2.28 % ±1.57%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='default' type='all' * -0.78 % ±0.62%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='default' type='load' * -0.74 % ±0.60%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='named' type='access' * -2.11 % ±1.64%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='named' type='load' *** -1.22 % ±0.54%

aduh95 · 2025-04-25T15:24:47Z

Benchmark CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js%20benchmark/job/benchmark-node-micro-benchmarks/1698/

Results

confidence improvement accuracy (*)
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/non-exist' packageConfigMain='' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 *** 1.06 % ±0.49%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.js' packageConfigMain='./index.js' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 * 0.80 % ±0.64%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.js' packageConfigMain='' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 * 0.65 % ±0.50%
esm/import-meta.js valuesToRead='dirname-and-filename' n=1000 *** -6.91 % ±0.63%
esm/import-meta.js valuesToRead='dirname' n=1000 *** -6.04 % ±0.67%
esm/import-meta.js valuesToRead='filename' n=1000 *** -6.25 % ±0.75%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='default' type='all' * -0.82 % ±0.69%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='named' type='all' * -0.64 % ±0.54%
esm/require-esm.js n=1000 exports='named' type='load' * -0.56 % ±0.51%

aduh95 · 2025-04-25T15:41:33Z

Benchmark CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js%20benchmark/job/benchmark-node-micro-benchmarks/1699/

Results

confidence improvement accuracy (*)
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/non-exist' packageConfigMain='./index.js' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 * 0.67 % ±0.55%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/non-exist' packageConfigMain='' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 ** 0.77 % ±0.54%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.js' packageConfigMain='' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 * 0.43 % ±0.37%
esm/esm-legacyMainResolve.js resolvedFile='node_modules/test/index.node' packageConfigMain='' packageJsonUrl='node_modules/test/package.json' n=10000 * 0.68 % ±0.56%
esm/esm-loader-defaultResolve.js specifier='node:os' n=1000 * 2.12 % ±1.99%
esm/import-meta.js valuesToRead='dirname-and-filename' n=1000 *** -6.39 % ±0.70%
esm/import-meta.js valuesToRead='dirname' n=1000 *** -5.30 % ±0.70%
esm/import-meta.js valuesToRead='filename' n=1000 *** -4.77 % ±0.75%

aduh95 · 2025-04-29T20:55:35Z

Landed in 50cfc6c

PR-URL: #57286 Reviewed-By: Jacob Smith <jacob@frende.me> Reviewed-By: Edy Silva <edigleyssonsilva@gmail.com>

nodejs-github-bot added c++ Issues and PRs that require attention from people who are familiar with C++. esm Issues and PRs related to the ECMAScript Modules implementation. needs-ci PRs that need a full CI run. labels Mar 3, 2025

JakobJingleheimer approved these changes Mar 3, 2025
View reviewed changes

Comment threadlib/internal/modules/esm/initialize_import_meta.js Outdated
Comment threadsrc/node_modules.cc Outdated

geeksilva97 reviewed Mar 3, 2025
View reviewed changes

Comment threadsrc/node_modules.cc Outdated

geeksilva97 reviewed Mar 3, 2025
View reviewed changes

Comment threadsrc/node_modules.cc Outdated

jsumners-nr reviewed Mar 4, 2025
View reviewed changes

aduh95 added author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. labels Mar 10, 2025

github-actionsBot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Mar 10, 2025

geeksilva97 approved these changes Mar 10, 2025
View reviewed changes

aduh95 added the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Mar 13, 2025

github-actionsBot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Mar 13, 2025

jasnell reviewed Mar 13, 2025
View reviewed changes

Comment threadsrc/node_modules.cc Outdated
jasnellMar 13, 2025
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nit: can these please avoid the use of Check() and propagate errors up correctly?

aduh95 mentioned this pull request Apr 25, 2025
esm: avoid import.meta setup costs for unused properties #57003
Closed

src: port initializeImportMeta to native
a1edf9c

aduh95 force-pushed the port-import-meta-native branch from f38430c to e7c7320Compare April 25, 2025 14:27

aduh95 added 4 commits April 25, 2025 16:38

lint
24cc9a6

fixup! lint
e2beab2

fixup! lint
8f5285b

benchmark: disambiguate filename and dirname read perf
3fa0db0

aduh95 added 3 commits April 25, 2025 17:33

fixup! benchmark: disambiguate filename and dirname read perf
79ec952

Revert "add private property to avoid calling ada twice"
077bde3

fixup! Revert "add private property to avoid calling ada twice"
6b10319

aduh95 mentioned this pull request Apr 27, 2025
benchmark: disambiguate filename and dirname read perf #58056
Merged

aduh95 merged commit 50cfc6c into nodejs:mainApr 29, 2025

aduh95 deleted the port-import-meta-native branch April 29, 2025 20:55

RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 1, 2025
esm: avoid import.meta setup costs for unused properties
77c49c5
PR-URL: #57286 Reviewed-By: Jacob Smith <jacob@frende.me> Reviewed-By: Edy Silva <edigleyssonsilva@gmail.com>

RafaelGSS mentioned this pull request May 1, 2025
2025-05-06, Version 24.0.0 (Current) #57609
Merged

RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 2, 2025
esm: avoid import.meta setup costs for unused properties
c4ca0d7
PR-URL: #57286 Reviewed-By: Jacob Smith <jacob@frende.me> Reviewed-By: Edy Silva <edigleyssonsilva@gmail.com>

aduh95 added a commit that referenced this pull request May 6, 2025
esm: avoid import.meta setup costs for unused properties
4ccf824
PR-URL: #57286 Reviewed-By: Jacob Smith <jacob@frende.me> Reviewed-By: Edy Silva <edigleyssonsilva@gmail.com>

aduh95 added a commit that referenced this pull request May 6, 2025
esm: avoid import.meta setup costs for unused properties
2c88dfa
PR-URL: #57286 Reviewed-By: Jacob Smith <jacob@frende.me> Reviewed-By: Edy Silva <edigleyssonsilva@gmail.com>

RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 14, 2025
esm: avoid import.meta setup costs for unused properties
87b9b30
PR-URL: #57286 Reviewed-By: Jacob Smith <jacob@frende.me> Reviewed-By: Edy Silva <edigleyssonsilva@gmail.com>

aduh95 added a commit that referenced this pull request May 16, 2025
esm: avoid import.meta setup costs for unused properties
b40c295
PR-URL: #57286 Reviewed-By: Jacob Smith <jacob@frende.me> Reviewed-By: Edy Silva <edigleyssonsilva@gmail.com>

aduh95 added a commit that referenced this pull request May 17, 2025
esm: avoid import.meta setup costs for unused properties
a6b417e
PR-URL: #57286 Reviewed-By: Jacob Smith <jacob@frende.me> Reviewed-By: Edy Silva <edigleyssonsilva@gmail.com>

aduh95 added a commit that referenced this pull request May 18, 2025
esm: avoid import.meta setup costs for unused properties
ae8fb90
PR-URL: #57286 Reviewed-By: Jacob Smith <jacob@frende.me> Reviewed-By: Edy Silva <edigleyssonsilva@gmail.com>

github-actionsBot mentioned this pull request May 19, 2025
2025-05-21, Version 22.16.0 'Jod' (LTS) #58388
Merged

aduh95 added a commit that referenced this pull request May 19, 2025
esm: avoid import.meta setup costs for unused properties
bef06b1
PR-URL: #57286 Reviewed-By: Jacob Smith <jacob@frende.me> Reviewed-By: Edy Silva <edigleyssonsilva@gmail.com>

marco-ippolito added the dont-land-on-v20.x label Jun 5, 2025

ghost mentioned this pull request Jun 8, 2025
### Notable Changes autofix-ci/action#28
Closed

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

aduh95 commented Mar 3, 2025

Uh oh!

nodejs-github-bot commented Mar 3, 2025

Uh oh!

codecovBot commented Mar 3, 2025• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

JakobJingleheimer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jsumners-nr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

aduh95 commented Mar 6, 2025

Uh oh!

jsumners-nr commented Mar 10, 2025

Uh oh!

nodejs-github-bot commented Mar 10, 2025• edited by aduh95 Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

aduh95 commented Mar 13, 2025• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

aduh95 commented Mar 13, 2025• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

nodejs-github-bot commented Mar 13, 2025

Uh oh!

jasnellMar 13, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jasnellMar 13, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jasnellMar 13, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jsumners-nr commented Mar 13, 2025

Uh oh!

jasnell commented Mar 13, 2025

Uh oh!

aduh95 commented Mar 13, 2025

Uh oh!

JakobJingleheimer commented Mar 30, 2025

Uh oh!

aduh95 commented Apr 25, 2025• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

aduh95 commented Apr 25, 2025• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

aduh95 commented Apr 25, 2025• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

aduh95 commented Apr 29, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

7 participants

codecovBot commented Mar 3, 2025•
edited
Loading

nodejs-github-bot commented Mar 10, 2025•
edited by aduh95
Loading

aduh95 commented Mar 13, 2025•
edited
Loading

aduh95 commented Mar 13, 2025•
edited
Loading

aduh95 commented Apr 25, 2025•
edited
Loading

aduh95 commented Apr 25, 2025•
edited
Loading

aduh95 commented Apr 25, 2025•
edited
Loading