-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.6k
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
lib: pass internalBinding more implicitly #16218
Conversation
Modify passing of the `internalBinding` function so that it’s easier for core modules to adopt, and also not even accessible through `--expose-internals`. This also splits the module wrapper into a separate version for internal bindings and for CJS modules, which seems like a good idea given the different semantics.
587834c
to
60c862f
Compare
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.
LGTM if the CI passes.
Failures in CI are unrelated. |
Landed in e6dfd59 |
Modify passing of the `internalBinding` function so that it’s easier for core modules to adopt, and also not even accessible through `--expose-internals`. This also splits the module wrapper into a separate version for internal bindings and for CJS modules, which seems like a good idea given the different semantics. PR-URL: #16218 Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <refack@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Modify passing of the `internalBinding` function so that it’s easier for core modules to adopt, and also not even accessible through `--expose-internals`. This also splits the module wrapper into a separate version for internal bindings and for CJS modules, which seems like a good idea given the different semantics. PR-URL: nodejs/node#16218 Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <refack@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Should this be backported to 8.x? If so would you be willing to do so @addaleax ? |
Should this be backported to |
After talking with @addaleax I am going to backport this to v8.x |
Modify passing of the `internalBinding` function so that it’s easier for core modules to adopt, and also not even accessible through `--expose-internals`. This also splits the module wrapper into a separate version for internal bindings and for CJS modules, which seems like a good idea given the different semantics. PR-URL: nodejs#16218 Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <refack@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Modify passing of the `internalBinding` function so that it’s easier for core modules to adopt, and also not even accessible through `--expose-internals`. This also splits the module wrapper into a separate version for internal bindings and for CJS modules, which seems like a good idea given the different semantics. PR-URL: nodejs#16218 Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <refack@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Modify passing of the
internalBinding
function so that it’s easier for core modules to adopt, and also not even accessible through--expose-internals
.This also splits the module wrapper into a separate version for internal bindings and for CJS modules, which seems like a good idea given the different semantics.
Checklist
make -j4 test
(UNIX), orvcbuild test
(Windows) passesAffected core subsystem(s)
lib