Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
lib: remove bootstrap global context indirection - #5881
Conversation
bnoordhuis
commented
Mar 24, 2016
LGTM, I suppose. |
cjihrig
commented
Mar 24, 2016
LGTM |
bmeck
commented
Mar 24, 2016
agree, the "use strict" and then old convention of using |
jasnell
commented
Mar 24, 2016
LGTM |
Fishrock123
commented
Mar 24, 2016
@jasnell This poses no risk to lts, but at the same time no benefit either. CI before landing: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/2055/ |
Fishrock123
commented
Mar 24, 2016
Part of me wonders if this should be passed at all though? I guess this makes I could probably just do it in C++ if that is even less confusing. |
bmeck
commented
Mar 24, 2016
@Fishrock123 it was always using one passed via C++, it is just a convention/style gotcha |
Fishrock123
commented
Mar 24, 2016
@bmeck I mean the only place we actually need it passed is to set |
bmeck
commented
Mar 24, 2016
@Fishrock123 ah, I see yes, you could manually set |
d074e34 to
1dc1278CompareFishrock123
commented
Mar 24, 2016
Moved to c++, CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/2056/ |
jasnell
commented
Mar 24, 2016
I marked it don't land on v4.x because the underlying refactoring of src/node.js hasn't been pulled back. I'm not sure if we should. @nodejs/lts |
Fishrock123
commented
Mar 24, 2016
@jasnell This should take no effort to backport? |
jasnell
commented
Mar 24, 2016
It's more a question over whether we should, not about how much effort is involved. @nodejs/lts ... what do you think? |
1dc1278 to
e69686cCompareThere was a problem hiding this comment.
From #5888 (comment)
Looks this is was duplicated and unnecessary.
Fishrock123
commented
Mar 30, 2016
Could I get this re-LTGM'd, since I changed most of it from the original? |
cjihrig
commented
Mar 30, 2016
LGTM |
PR-URL: nodejs#5881 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
e69686c to
21d66d6Compare| Local<Value> arg = env->process_object(); | ||
| f->Call(global, 1, &arg); | ||
| f->Call(Null(env->isolate()), ARRAY_SIZE(&arg), &arg); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this code was changed after I reviewed it? Because ARRAY_SIZE(&arg) doesn't do what you think it does.
evanlucas
commented
Mar 31, 2016
With Ben's comment, perhaps we should hold off on this on v5? |
Fishrock123
commented
Apr 4, 2016
@bnoordhuis I'm not sure what you mean by that? Trevor suggested it. It was originally |
bnoordhuis
commented
Apr 4, 2016
The problem is that Local<Value> argv[] = { a, b, c }; // ARRAY_SIZE(&argv) is *not* 3 like you would expect |
MylesBorins
commented
Apr 5, 2016
@Fishrock123 this is not landing cleanly on |
Fishrock123
commented
Apr 5, 2016
Really? I'll take a look when get home. @thealphanerd this is not important for the release. |
PR-URL: nodejs#5881 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Conflicts: lib/internal/bootstrap_node.js src/node.cc
PR-URL: #5881 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Conflicts: lib/internal/bootstrap_node.js src/node.cc
Pull Request check-list
make -j8 test(UNIX) orvcbuild test nosign(Windows) pass withthis change (including linting)?
Affected core subsystem(s)
lib,bootstrap
Description of change
From an irc discussion with @bmeck, this is less confusing than relying on what the "this" context is.