-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.9k
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
src: changed stdio_pipes_ to std::vector #23615
Conversation
src/spawn_sync.cc
Outdated
if (h != nullptr) { | ||
r = h->Start(); | ||
std::vector<std::unique_ptr<SyncProcessStdioPipe>>::iterator iter; | ||
for (iter = stdio_pipes_.begin(); iter != stdio_pipes_.end(); ++iter) { |
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.
Feel free to use a for (const auto& pipe : stdio_pipes_)
loop here :)
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.
I'm going to explicitly request this change.
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.
src/spawn_sync.cc
Outdated
stdio_pipes_[i]->Close(); | ||
std::vector<std::unique_ptr<SyncProcessStdioPipe>>::iterator iter; | ||
for (iter = stdio_pipes_.begin(); iter != stdio_pipes_.end(); ++iter) { | ||
SyncProcessStdioPipe* pipe = (*iter).get(); |
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.
ditto here :)
src/spawn_sync.cc
Outdated
if (h != nullptr) { | ||
r = h->Start(); | ||
std::vector<std::unique_ptr<SyncProcessStdioPipe>>::iterator iter; | ||
for (iter = stdio_pipes_.begin(); iter != stdio_pipes_.end(); ++iter) { |
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.
I'm going to explicitly request this change.
Hello @niboch and thank you for the contribution 🥇 |
@refack this can also be resolved while landing. I'll put together a PR that resolves that later on. |
I just went ahead and pushed a fixup to the branch and dismissed the comment due to that. |
CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/17934/ (:heavy_check_mark:) |
I'm actually of a mind to say that if the author in not engaged, and doesn't follow up, we shouldn't land. |
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.
Give author a change to follow up.
P.s. please don't dismiss my review without my consent. |
@refack if you disagree with this, I suggest to open an issue to discuss this in general. But so far we have often helped people to get their PR into Node.js, no matter if we had to "fix" small edges or not (this is especially true for Code & Learn events). In this case the PR itself was technically fine and it's mainly a "style" issue. Thus, I don't think we should block this PR. |
Ping @nodejs/tsc ... please weigh in on this. |
Agree with @jasnell and @BridgeAR. The question is whether the change is an improvement to the code base, not who did or didn't do what and when. I'm opposed to permitting the blocking PRs on "author engagement" metrics. That said, caring about author engagement is reasonable. I just don't think it should block a change that is ready to go or trivially close. |
I say give the author time to follow up, don't do the work for them. The whole "edit others PRs" issue is a delicate one, and might even be experienced as condescending or aggressive by some. tl;dr, let's restore the change set and allow time for the author to follow up. |
Hey Everyone, Sorry about not responding earlier! I had fixed it in my local code but did not push as I've been a bit busy at work, Since this is my first pull request I wasn't sure how to amend it and was going to ask how to do that here. It looks like @BridgeAR already pushed So I assume everything is good? My code was basically the same as what he committed. |
@niboch thank you for following up. I'm happy you are still engaged, and I hope we can land this soon. |
PR-URL: nodejs#23615 Reviewed-By: Sam Ruby <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]>
🎉 Congratulations @niboch on getting promoted from I hope you enjoyed the experience, and that we will see more contributions from you in the future 😉 |
Thanks for the contribution! 🎉 (If you're interested in other possible contributions to Node.js but don't have a good idea of where to start looking, some ideas are posted at https://www.nodetodo.org/next-steps/.) |
PR-URL: #23615 Reviewed-By: Sam Ruby <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #23615 Reviewed-By: Sam Ruby <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #23615 Reviewed-By: Sam Ruby <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #23615 Reviewed-By: Sam Ruby <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #23615 Reviewed-By: Sam Ruby <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]>
Checklist
make -j4 test
(UNIX), orvcbuild test
(Windows) passes