Skip to content
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

doc: improve unhandledException doc copy #5287

Closed

Conversation

jasnell
Copy link
Member

@jasnell jasnell commented Feb 17, 2016

Rework the doc a bit to tighten it up, including removing the
use of you

@jasnell jasnell added doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations. process Issues and PRs related to the process subsystem. labels Feb 17, 2016

Example of listening for `'uncaughtException'`:
For example:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Tiniest nit: consistent would be "Example:" afaik

@eljefedelrodeodeljefe
Copy link
Contributor

Good one. LGTM, minus (nit and) conflicts. /cc @nodejs/documentation

@a0viedo
Copy link
Member

a0viedo commented Feb 24, 2016

LGTM

listener is added for this exception, the default action (which is to print
a stack trace and exit) will not occur.
The `'uncaughtException'` event is emitted when an exception bubbles all the
way back to the event loop. By default, Node.js handles such exceptions by printing the stack trace to stderr and exiting. Adding a handler for the
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Isn't this line longer than the usual limit?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yep, will correct the wrapping on landing.

@jasnell
Copy link
Member Author

jasnell commented Mar 2, 2016

@nodejs/documentation ... can I get some more LGTM's on this from Collaborators?

@r-52
Copy link
Contributor

r-52 commented Mar 2, 2016

LGTM

@thefourtheye
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM - the merge conflict.

@jasnell
Copy link
Member Author

jasnell commented Mar 3, 2016

yep, will rebase before landing

Rework the doc a bit to tighten it up, including removing the
use of `you`
@jasnell jasnell force-pushed the doc-unhandled-exception-improvement branch from 1657b60 to 72d29e6 Compare March 3, 2016 20:57
@jasnell
Copy link
Member Author

jasnell commented Mar 3, 2016

Rebased!

jasnell added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 3, 2016
Rework the doc a bit to tighten it up, including removing the
use of `you`

Fix some line wrapping issues.

PR-URL: #5287
Reviewed-By: Roman Klauke <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Sakthipriyan Vairamani <[email protected]>

...
@jasnell
Copy link
Member Author

jasnell commented Mar 3, 2016

Landed in 831b30e

@jasnell jasnell closed this Mar 3, 2016
@Fishrock123 Fishrock123 mentioned this pull request Mar 7, 2016
Fishrock123 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 8, 2016
Rework the doc a bit to tighten it up, including removing the
use of `you`

Fix some line wrapping issues.

PR-URL: #5287
Reviewed-By: Roman Klauke <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Sakthipriyan Vairamani <[email protected]>

...
Fishrock123 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 8, 2016
Rework the doc a bit to tighten it up, including removing the
use of `you`

Fix some line wrapping issues.

PR-URL: #5287
Reviewed-By: Roman Klauke <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Sakthipriyan Vairamani <[email protected]>

...
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 17, 2016
Rework the doc a bit to tighten it up, including removing the
use of `you`

Fix some line wrapping issues.

PR-URL: #5287
Reviewed-By: Roman Klauke <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Sakthipriyan Vairamani <[email protected]>

...
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 21, 2016
Rework the doc a bit to tighten it up, including removing the
use of `you`

Fix some line wrapping issues.

PR-URL: #5287
Reviewed-By: Roman Klauke <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Sakthipriyan Vairamani <[email protected]>

...
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations. process Issues and PRs related to the process subsystem.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants