-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
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
Introduce worker-trig
module
#4
Introduce worker-trig
module
#4
Conversation
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ exports.createCart = async (name, email) => { | |||
return result[0]; | |||
}; | |||
|
|||
exports.checkIfHasCart = async email => { | |||
exports.checkIfHasCart = async (email) => { | |||
const result = await knex("shopping_carts") | |||
.select("id") | |||
.where({ owner_email: email }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nit: Fits on one line
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Off the top of my head, this seems feasible, but that would make MemoryRetainer more sophisticated than what it currently is - it is now only for the heap snapshot integration, moving memory management bits there may require a bit more thoughts into this...(the general idea of making it more powerful sounds cool though, and probably can help with nodejs/diagnostics#155)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please focus on readability for others to understand 3
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
a
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
1
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
241
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
23143
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
32312341234
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
1234
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
last test 🗡
I don't plan to merge this immediately and think all the names on npm cause problems. Kind of leaning on nodejs/TSC#389 , but am also open to changing the name, all simple ones seem to conflict though. |
The introductory paragraph in GOVERNANCE.md does not add anything that |
Checklist Remove duplication in a description. |
The _handle property on crypto classes was runtime deprecated in node 11, this removes them. Checklist |
test |
123 |
1234 |
2341 |
42 |
This adds a new module for handling MIME types. It is standalone based upon the WHATWG MIME standards, but is more intended to open up APIs that wish to use MIME for coordinating content types. I have left out the various sniffing for content bodies until a future date as I believe that is a longer discussion than just parsing and serializing. The API is based upon URL and URLSearchParams and intentionally allows us to expand MIMEParams for dealing with multiple parameters with the same name (.getAll / .append etc.).