fix: isConstruct is wrong when symlinking libraries
#955
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
`Construct.isConstruct` was still using (and recommending) `instanceof`, even though `instanceof` can never be made to work reliably. When we thought `instanceof` was safe to use again, it's because we thought that `npm install` combined with `peerDependencies` would make sure only one copy of `constructs` would ever be installed. That's correct, but monorepos and users using `npm link` can still mess up that guarantee, so we cannot rely on it after all.
Signed-off-by: github-actions <[email protected]>
Chriscbr
approved these changes
Mar 21, 2022
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've been pondering for a bit if there's any ways this could cause a regression, but I can't think of anything...
Approving with do-not-merge so you can look one comment I added. Since this library is used in a lot of places, though, it might not hurt to get a second pair of eyes on this. :)
Comment on lines
+555
to
+560
| // Mark all instances of 'Construct' | ||
| Object.defineProperty(Construct.prototype, CONSTRUCT_SYM, { | ||
| value: true, | ||
| enumerable: false, | ||
| writable: false, | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why not put this in the constructor? (is there any difference?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The difference is where the symbol lives: on the instance or on the class.
This puts it on the class, putting it in the construct (and presumably passing this instead of Construct.prototype) would put it on the instance.
Putting it on the class saves an instruction on every construct instantiation, and the memory of saving it in every symbol table (plus it might potentially have some impact on V8s optimizations... though I'm for sure not looking at any of that!)
It's probably a minor thing, but this ought to be slightly more efficient.
MrArnoldPalmer
approved these changes
Mar 22, 2022
mnapoli
added a commit
to mnapoli/aws-cdk
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 22, 2022
Fixes aws#17974 Inspired from aws/constructs#955
4 tasks
mnapoli
added a commit
to mnapoli/aws-cdk
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 23, 2022
Fixes aws#17974 Inspired from aws/constructs#955
mnapoli
added a commit
to mnapoli/aws-cdk
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 23, 2022
Fixes aws#17974 Inspired from aws/constructs#955
mnapoli
added a commit
to mnapoli/aws-cdk
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 23, 2022
Fixes aws#17974 Inspired from aws/constructs#955
mnapoli
added a commit
to mnapoli/aws-cdk
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 23, 2022
Fixes aws#17974 Inspired from aws/constructs#955
mnapoli
added a commit
to mnapoli/aws-cdk
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 23, 2022
Fixes aws#17974 Inspired from aws/constructs#955
mergify bot
pushed a commit
to aws/aws-cdk
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 29, 2022
Fixes #17974 Follow-up of #14468 This follows the implementation of aws/constructs#955 to be more robust. ---- ### All Submissions: * [x] Have you followed the guidelines in our [Contributing guide?](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md) ### Adding new Unconventional Dependencies: * [ ] This PR adds new unconventional dependencies following the process described [here](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md/#adding-new-unconventional-dependencies) ### New Features * [ ] Have you added the new feature to an [integration test](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/INTEGRATION_TESTS.md)? * [ ] Did you use `cdk-integ` to deploy the infrastructure and generate the snapshot (i.e. `cdk-integ` without `--dry-run`)? *By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license*
mergify bot
pushed a commit
to cdk8s-team/cdk8s-core
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 29, 2022
Fixes #401 I haven't explicitly tested this with the scenario described in #401 but I believe the root cause is the same issue described [here](aws/constructs#955). In a nutshell, "instanceof" is unreliable since it can cause issues if libraries are referencing different versions of cdk8s library in `node_modules`. Signed-off-by: Christopher Rybicki <[email protected]>
StevePotter
pushed a commit
to StevePotter/aws-cdk
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 27, 2022
Fixes aws#17974 Follow-up of aws#14468 This follows the implementation of aws/constructs#955 to be more robust. ---- ### All Submissions: * [x] Have you followed the guidelines in our [Contributing guide?](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md) ### Adding new Unconventional Dependencies: * [ ] This PR adds new unconventional dependencies following the process described [here](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md/#adding-new-unconventional-dependencies) ### New Features * [ ] Have you added the new feature to an [integration test](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/INTEGRATION_TESTS.md)? * [ ] Did you use `cdk-integ` to deploy the infrastructure and generate the snapshot (i.e. `cdk-integ` without `--dry-run`)? *By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license*
2 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Construct.isConstructwas still using (and recommending)instanceof,even though
instanceofcan never be made to work reliably.When we thought
instanceofwas safe to use again, it's because wethought that
npm installcombined withpeerDependencieswouldmake sure only one copy of
constructswould ever be installed.That's correct, but monorepos and users using
npm linkcanstill mess up that guarantee, so we cannot rely on it after all.