doc: add miss line for cjs

[fishel-feng]

doc: add miss line for cjs

[nodejs-github-bot]

Review requested:

• @nodejs/http
• @nodejs/net

[ShogunPanda]

I think the message should be doc: add missing line for cjs example, but I'm not sure if this is a blocker.

[aduh95]

Thanks for the PR. process is available on the global object, it's not necessary to require it. It's not a missing line, it was omitted on purpose.

[ShogunPanda]

In that case shall we remove it from ESM? (and eventually look for other places in our docs?

[fishel-feng]

Thanks for the PR. process is available on the global object, it's not necessary to require it. It's not a missing line, it was omitted on purpose.

@aduh95 It's not equivalent with the ESM demo, If we do omit it, it should be removed.

[fishel-feng]

In that case shall we remove it from ESM? (and eventually look for other places in our docs?

@ShogunPanda I just make it same to the ESM demo. And most of the demo use manually import for process. There isn't a norm right now. It is recommended that all documents be checked if necessary.

[aduh95]

Thanks for the PR. process is available on the global object, it's not necessary to require it. It's not a missing line, it was omitted on purpose.

@aduh95 It's not equivalent with the ESM demo, If we do omit it, it should be removed.

Who said that CJS and ESM examples needed to be line-by-line equivalent?

In that case shall we remove it from ESM? (and eventually look for other places in our docs?

No, for ESM we made the choice to always import Node.js-specific globals.

[ShogunPanda]

Thanks for the PR. process is available on the global object, it's not necessary to require it. It's not a missing line, it was omitted on purpose.

@aduh95 It's not equivalent with the ESM demo, If we do omit it, it should be removed.

Who said that CJS and ESM examples needed to be line-by-line equivalent?

No one, it was my assumption.

In that case shall we remove it from ESM? (and eventually look for other places in our docs?

No, for ESM we made the choice to always import Node.js-specific globals.

I see, didn't know about it. We don't need to do anything then.
If you get the chance (and will, and time), can you tell me (or link me a issue/discussion/whatever) on reason behind this decision?

[fishel-feng]

No, for ESM we made the choice to always import Node.js-specific globals.

In other examples this norm is not followed. No one said anything was necessary, but I think it is necessary to follow a unified processing method. You can just turn off the PR. It's not my project, and it has nothing to do with me whether it's good or bad.

[aduh95]

In other examples this norm is not followed.

Do you have specific examples where this is the case? It seems we should fix those.

[aduh95]

If you get the chance (and will, and time), can you tell me (or link me a issue/discussion/whatever) on reason behind this decision?

It was done in #39043.