-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.8k
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
net: Socket.prototype.connect should accept args like net.connect #11761 #11762
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ | ||
'use strict'; | ||
const common = require('../common'); | ||
|
||
// This test ensures that socket.connect can be called without callback | ||
// which is optional. | ||
|
||
const net = require('net'); | ||
|
||
const server = net.createServer(common.mustCall(function(conn) { | ||
conn.end(); | ||
server.close(); | ||
})).listen(0, common.mustCall(function() { | ||
const client = new net.Socket(); | ||
|
||
client.on('connect', common.mustCall(function() { | ||
client.end(); | ||
})); | ||
|
||
client.connect(server.address()); | ||
})); |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
@joyeecheung Are you ok with this comment being added?
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.
this code is same code as original line number 62 to 68.
and while doing this, i also considered
exports.createConnection
this function to just createnew Socket
and callconnect
by just forwarding arguments (for higher code coverage, if it is okay to moveoptions.timeout
also withinSocket.prototype.connect
.e.g.
what do you think @joyeecheung @mscdex
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.
never mind. i think this code cannot be merged easily since
new Socket
requires normalized options.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'll be OK with that if it's just copy-pasting.
The timeouts are added in #8101, I can't see any harm adding them to
Socket.prototype.connect
, so +1 to reduce code duplicate.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.
Yup. but anyway we need to
normalizeArgs
onexports.createConnection
since arguments ofnew Socket
needs normalized arguments.I will just add one more commit to move timeout from
exports.createConnection
toSocket.prototype.connect
.After that, maybe it should be good to merge?
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.
@vhain I think it's already good to merge since it fixes #11761 without moving the
timeout
option handling.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.
@vhain (hit the button too soon)..but yeah you can push it here(should be semver-patch) or add it in a separate PR(semver-minor).
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.
@joyeecheung oops.. was too fast. already added commit to this PR. do you want me to revert that commit only?
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.
@vhain I don't think it needs to be reverted if no one objects to / spots a bug caused by moving it down though.
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.
@joyeecheung right. it needs to be different branch and PR. i'm on it.
it's done ccb807e