lib: add aborted() utility function #46494
Conversation
|
I think this would require further discussion since the conversation on the original issue stopped at 2021, nonetheless have tried to implement the discussed details until then and have added tests cc @benjamingr, @jasnell |
aduh95
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This would need documentation, as well as tests with invalid types/values to ensure we correctly validate the input.
|
Yes adding to those tests, Docs can I update after this is confirmed that this change is acceptable? |
| const ac = new AbortController(); | ||
| aborted(ac.signal, {}).then(common.mustNotCall()); | ||
| setImmediate(() => { | ||
| global.gc(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What does GC accomplish here? That the aborted() promise is collected before abort() is called?
I don't know if that kind of GC observability is a good thing. Maybe it works now but GC changes can break such patterns. Looks fragile.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
basically want to cleanup the empty object to check if the listener is removed when the resource is cleaned by the gc, unsure of any other ways to test this
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If it's just for testing, then it's probably fine. I mean, it could still break in the future but we can revisit if and when that happens.
I'd advise against documenting that behavior though. It's simply not very robust.
benjamingr
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Mostly LGTM, missing docs (this should be marked as experimental, and as for where it should live I'll ping some TSC folk and ask)
|
Have added to the docs, @benjamingr @aduh95 |
Co-authored-by: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
| */ | ||
| async function aborted(signal, resource) { | ||
| if (signal === undefined) { | ||
| throw new ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE('signal', 'AbortSignal', signal); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Have added this check since turns out changing the condition in validateAbortSignal() immediately results in the build breaking, so i assume its probably not a bug but would like a review here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It seems like a common pattern across to the codebase to check for undefined and then validate the signal so i think its probably fine?
|
Landed in 6d584ae |
Fixes: #37220
Refs: #36607