fix(ext/node): support createConnection option in node:http.request() #25470
Conversation
satyarohith
force-pushed
the
support_create_connection
branch
from
c807b0e
to
abda518
Compare
satyarohith
force-pushed
the
support_create_connection
branch
from
89a4de0
to
e98525c
Compare
kt3k
force-pushed
the
support_create_connection
branch
from
aedab15
to
9c1b39b
Compare
kt3k
force-pushed
the
support_create_connection
branch
from
bbd15fb
to
2f9cdaa
Compare
kt3k
changed the title
Yoshiya Hinosawa <stibium121@gmail.com>
Instead use workaround reading callstack in `connect()` call and pause the socket when it's from @npmcli/agent. This prevents the undesirable initial read of the socket.
Signed-off-by: Satya Rohith <me@satyarohith.com>
This reverts commit 7cf82b7.
Signed-off-by: Satya Rohith <me@satyarohith.com>
| where | ||
| P: crate::NodePermissions + 'static, | ||
| { | ||
| let client = if let Some(rid) = client_rid { | ||
| let r = state | ||
| let (_handle, mut sender) = if encrypted { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not confident we should forget the handle to the spawned task - the errors raised from the task will not be handled and they should probably be piped back. I can't think of a particular scenario at the moment though
tests/unit_node/http_test.ts
Outdated
| // TODO(kt3k): This should be "localhost" when we implemented happy-eyeballs for node:net | ||
| const request = http.request("http://127.0.0.1:5929/"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Will all these changes cause regressions in already working libraries? Should we implement happy-eyeballs first?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we implement happy-eyeballs first?
I guess that is safer.
|
Can we get this merged asap, it fixes vital issues with many libraries! |
|
|
Work in progress. Feature works but breaks existing tests.
Closes #19507