Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

test,lib,benchmark: match function names #9113

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

Trott
Copy link
Member

@Trott Trott commented Oct 15, 2016

Checklist
  • make -j8 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test nosign (Windows) passes
  • commit message follows commit guidelines
Affected core subsystem(s)

test lib benchmark

Description of change

In most cases, named functions match the variable or property to which
they are being assigned. That also seems to be the practice in a series
of PRs currently being evaluated that name currently-anonymous
functions.

This change applies that rule to instances in the code base that don't
comply with that practice.

This will be enforceable with a lint rule once we upgrade to ESLint
3.8.0.

In most cases, named functions match the variable or property to which
they are being assigned. That also seems to be the practice in a series
of PRs currently being evaluated that name currently-anonymous
functions.

This change applies that rule to instances in the code base that don't
comply with that practice.

This will be enforceable with a lint rule once we upgrade to ESLint
3.8.0.
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added the lib / src Issues and PRs related to general changes in the lib or src directory. label Oct 15, 2016
@Trott Trott added test Issues and PRs related to the tests. benchmark Issues and PRs related to the benchmark subsystem. labels Oct 15, 2016
Copy link
Member

@targos targos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't mind the changes. +0 on activating the rule.

@@ -340,10 +340,10 @@ TLSSocket.prototype._wrapHandle = function(wrap) {
res._secureContext = context;
res.reading = handle.reading;
Object.defineProperty(handle, 'reading', {
get: function readingGetter() {
get: function get() {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What about using get() { ?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I find that confusing to read. I will probably change my opinion as it becomes more common and I get used to seeing it. If there's a strong preference for it among others, I'll use it. But if left to my own devices, I prefer the explicit key: value format instead.

return res.reading;
},
set: function readingSetter(value) {
set: function set(value) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ditto

cb();
};

s.destroy = s.destroySoon = function destroy() {
s.destroy = s.destroySoon = function destroySoon() {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This one is ambiguous. I would keep destroy if I had the choice. Did ESLint complain?
Anyway that's fine. It's just a test...

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, ESLint wanted it to be destroySoon. I agree that destroy is probably preferable, I'll switch it back.

@@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ const tests = [
expected: [prompt, replFailedRead, prompt, replDisabled, prompt]
},
{ // Make sure this is always the last test, since we change os.homedir()
before: function mockHomedirFailure() {
before: function before() {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit: shorthand syntax

@@ -291,7 +291,7 @@ const testCustomCompleterSyncMode = repl.start({
prompt: '',
input: putIn,
output: putIn,
completer: function completerSyncMode(line) {
completer: function completer(line) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ditto here and on line 326.

Copy link
Member

@jasnell jasnell left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@lpinca lpinca mentioned this pull request Oct 17, 2016
2 tasks
@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Oct 18, 2016

@rvagg rvagg force-pushed the master branch 2 times, most recently from c133999 to 83c7a88 Compare October 18, 2016 17:02
@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Oct 18, 2016

@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Oct 20, 2016

One more CI for good measure: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit/5698/

Only red in that one is a build failure on a Raspberry Pi.

Trott added a commit to Trott/io.js that referenced this pull request Oct 20, 2016
In most cases, named functions match the variable or property to which
they are being assigned. That also seems to be the practice in a series
of PRs currently being evaluated that name currently-anonymous
functions.

This change applies that rule to instances in the code base that don't
comply with that practice.

This will be enforceable with a lint rule once we upgrade to ESLint
3.8.0.

PR-URL: nodejs#9113
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com>
@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Oct 20, 2016

Landed in 68ba9aa

@Trott Trott closed this Oct 20, 2016
jasnell pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 20, 2016
In most cases, named functions match the variable or property to which
they are being assigned. That also seems to be the practice in a series
of PRs currently being evaluated that name currently-anonymous
functions.

This change applies that rule to instances in the code base that don't
comply with that practice.

This will be enforceable with a lint rule once we upgrade to ESLint
3.8.0.

PR-URL: #9113
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 15, 2016
In most cases, named functions match the variable or property to which
they are being assigned. That also seems to be the practice in a series
of PRs currently being evaluated that name currently-anonymous
functions.

This change applies that rule to instances in the code base that don't
comply with that practice.

This will be enforceable with a lint rule once we upgrade to ESLint
3.8.0.

PR-URL: #9113
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com>
@MylesBorins
Copy link
Contributor

hey @Trott I've backported this to both v6 and v4 in 7b75cb9 and bd99b2d respectively.

The v4 change had some conflicts, specifically in files where you changes touched stuff that didn't exist in the tree.

I'm under the impression we would want this work backported, please let me know if we should revert.

@MylesBorins
Copy link
Contributor

it seems this backport did not happen on v4.x @Trott should we backport?

@MylesBorins MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Nov 22, 2016
@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Nov 22, 2016

it seems this backport did not happen on v4.x @Trott should we backport?

I'd prefer that we do, yes.

@MylesBorins
Copy link
Contributor

@Trott would you be willing to backport to v4.x?

Trott added a commit to Trott/io.js that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2016
In most cases, named functions match the variable or property to which
they are being assigned. That also seems to be the practice in a series
of PRs currently being evaluated that name currently-anonymous
functions.

This change applies that rule to instances in the code base that don't
comply with that practice.

This will be enforceable with a lint rule once we upgrade to ESLint
3.8.0.

PR-URL: nodejs#9113
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com>
@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Dec 21, 2016

@thealphanerd #10398

Trott added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 4, 2017
In most cases, named functions match the variable or property to which
they are being assigned. That also seems to be the practice in a series
of PRs currently being evaluated that name currently-anonymous
functions.

This change applies that rule to instances in the code base that don't
comply with that practice.

This will be enforceable with a lint rule once we upgrade to ESLint
3.8.0.

PR-URL: #9113
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 5, 2017
In most cases, named functions match the variable or property to which
they are being assigned. That also seems to be the practice in a series
of PRs currently being evaluated that name currently-anonymous
functions.

This change applies that rule to instances in the code base that don't
comply with that practice.

This will be enforceable with a lint rule once we upgrade to ESLint
3.8.0.

PR-URL: #9113
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 24, 2017
In most cases, named functions match the variable or property to which
they are being assigned. That also seems to be the practice in a series
of PRs currently being evaluated that name currently-anonymous
functions.

This change applies that rule to instances in the code base that don't
comply with that practice.

This will be enforceable with a lint rule once we upgrade to ESLint
3.8.0.

PR-URL: #9113
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com>
@MylesBorins MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Jan 24, 2017
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 1, 2017
In most cases, named functions match the variable or property to which
they are being assigned. That also seems to be the practice in a series
of PRs currently being evaluated that name currently-anonymous
functions.

This change applies that rule to instances in the code base that don't
comply with that practice.

This will be enforceable with a lint rule once we upgrade to ESLint
3.8.0.

PR-URL: #9113
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com>
@Trott Trott deleted the func-name-matching branch January 13, 2022 22:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
benchmark Issues and PRs related to the benchmark subsystem. lib / src Issues and PRs related to general changes in the lib or src directory. test Issues and PRs related to the tests.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants