GV

GeezerVison

The World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory.

Home|About|Gaming cabinet|Archives|How it works|Starter sites

On this site

  • Sign in
  • ActionsCI/CD and automation
  • CodespacesCloud development environments
  • All Features
  • Documentation
  • Training
  • Certifications
  • Build with Copilot
  • Customize Copilot
  • Integrations
  • Trending repos
  • GitHub Sponsors
  • Developer articles
  • Enterprises

This view

  • Original page
  • New address

GeezerVison is showing github.com — lib: restate the code to use primordials by PoojaDurgad · Pull Request #36552 · nodejs/node

Conversation

@PoojaDurgad

@PoojaDurgad PoojaDurgad commented Dec 17, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • tests and/or benchmarks are included
  • documentation is changed or added
  • commit message follows commit guidelines

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
bricss reacted with thumbs up emoji
All reactions
  • 👍 1 reaction
@PoojaDurgad
PoojaDurgad force-pushed the pri-validator branch from dfa522c to 07855be Compare December 17, 2020 15:10
aduh95
aduh95 reviewed Dec 17, 2020
View reviewed changes

@aduh95 aduh95 left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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.

Can you also replace those please:

node/lib/internal/validators.js

Line 66 in f28715d

if (!octalReg.test(value)) {

node/lib/internal/validators.js

Line 201 in f28715d

(typeof port === 'string' && port.trim().length === 0) ||

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
All reactions
Comment thread lib/internal/validators.js Resolved

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@PoojaDurgad

PoojaDurgad commented Dec 18, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Benchmark Cl : https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js%20benchmark/job/benchmark-node-micro-benchmarks/765/
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@PoojaDurgad

PoojaDurgad commented Dec 18, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@aduh95 - yes, I modified the changes. PTAL
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
aduh95
aduh95 approved these changes Dec 18, 2020
View reviewed changes
@PoojaDurgad PoojaDurgad added lib / src Issues and PRs involving general changes in the lib/ or src/ directories. author ready PRs with CI started, the required approvals, and no outstanding review comments. labels Dec 18, 2020
@Trott

Trott commented Dec 21, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Commit message should indicate where we are using more primordials. Maybe this?

lib: use more primordials in shared validators
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@Trott Trott removed the author ready PRs with CI started, the required approvals, and no outstanding review comments. label Dec 21, 2020
@Trott

Trott commented Dec 21, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Removed author ready label. It should not be added until a full CI is started.
PoojaDurgad reacted with thumbs up emoji
All reactions
  • 👍 1 reaction

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@Trott

Trott commented Dec 21, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Benchmark Cl : https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js%20benchmark/job/benchmark-node-micro-benchmarks/765/

It looks like the benchmark is for assert which is the default in the Jenkins interface. I could be wrong, but I don't think that's the benchmark we want here. I don't believe that uses the internal validators. I'm not sure what benchmark would be impacted by this code, but benchmark/util/type-check.js is worth a lock. If it is a relevant benchmark, then change assert to util in the Jenkins form and put type-check in the filter field.
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Trott
Trott approved these changes Dec 21, 2020
View reviewed changes

@Trott Trott left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

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 no benchmark or CI issues.

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
All reactions
@PoojaDurgad

PoojaDurgad commented Dec 21, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@Trott - Thanks for the review. without fully knowing it, I left the default values in jenkins interface.
Benchmark Cl: https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js%20benchmark/job/benchmark-node-micro-benchmarks/779/
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@PoojaDurgad

PoojaDurgad commented Dec 22, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Benchmark result : https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js%20benchmark/job/benchmark-node-micro-benchmarks/782/console

                                                                                                       confidence  improvement  accuracy (*)   (**)  (***)
14:31:32  util/type-check.js n=100000 argument='false-object' version='js' type='ArrayBufferView'                       -2.78 %       ±5.30% ±7.08%  ±9.28%
14:31:32  util/type-check.js n=100000 argument='false-object' version='js' type='TypedArray'                            -1.37 %       ±3.50% ±4.66%  ±6.07%
14:31:32  util/type-check.js n=100000 argument='false-object' version='js' type='Uint8Array'                      *      6.74 %       ±5.52% ±7.37%  ±9.66%
14:31:32  util/type-check.js n=100000 argument='false-object' version='native' type='ArrayBufferView'                    3.49 %       ±4.72% ±6.28%  ±8.18%
14:31:32  util/type-check.js n=100000 argument='false-object' version='native' type='TypedArray'                         0.36 %       ±4.63% ±6.15%  ±8.01%
14:31:32  util/type-check.js n=100000 argument='false-object' version='native' type='Uint8Array'                        -2.16 %       ±4.36% ±5.80%  ±7.55%
14:31:32  util/type-check.js n=100000 argument='false-primitive' version='js' type='ArrayBufferView'                    -3.30 %       ±5.65% ±7.52%  ±9.79%
14:31:32  util/type-check.js n=100000 argument='false-primitive' version='js' type='TypedArray'                         -2.13 %       ±4.46% ±5.94%  ±7.73%
14:31:32  util/type-check.js n=100000 argument='false-primitive' version='js' type='Uint8Array'                         -1.96 %       ±4.35% ±5.79%  ±7.53%
14:31:32  util/type-check.js n=100000 argument='false-primitive' version='native' type='ArrayBufferView'                -5.02 %       ±6.94% ±9.23% ±12.02%
14:31:32  util/type-check.js n=100000 argument='false-primitive' version='native' type='TypedArray'                      1.92 %       ±5.01% ±6.67%  ±8.69%
14:31:32  util/type-check.js n=100000 argument='false-primitive' version='native' type='Uint8Array'                      4.72 %       ±5.51% ±7.34%  ±9.58%
14:31:32  util/type-check.js n=100000 argument='true' version='js' type='ArrayBufferView'                               -1.16 %       ±5.77% ±7.69% ±10.03%
14:31:32  util/type-check.js n=100000 argument='true' version='js' type='TypedArray'                                     2.32 %       ±6.53% ±8.69% ±11.33%
14:31:32  util/type-check.js n=100000 argument='true' version='js' type='Uint8Array'                                    -0.87 %       ±4.90% ±6.52%  ±8.48%
14:31:32  util/type-check.js n=100000 argument='true' version='native' type='ArrayBufferView'                           -3.66 %       ±4.93% ±6.56%  ±8.53%
14:31:32  util/type-check.js n=100000 argument='true' version='native' type='TypedArray'                                 1.97 %       ±4.33% ±5.77%  ±7.53%
14:31:32  util/type-check.js n=100000 argument='true' version='native' type='Uint8Array'                                 0.84 %       ±4.62% ±6.15%  ±8.00%
14:31:32 
14:31:32 Be aware that when doing many comparisons the risk of a false-positive
14:31:32 result increases. In this case there are 18 comparisons, you can thus
14:31:32 expect the following amount of false-positive results:
14:31:32   0.90 false positives, when considering a   5% risk acceptance (*, **, ***),
14:31:32   0.18 false positives, when considering a   1% risk acceptance (**, ***),
14:31:32   0.02 false positives, when considering a 0.1% risk acceptance (***)

is this performance result within allowable limits?
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@aduh95 aduh95 added author ready PRs with CI started, the required approvals, and no outstanding review comments. request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. Only starts once the PR has an approving review. labels Dec 22, 2020
@github-actions github-actions Bot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. Only starts once the PR has an approving review. label Dec 22, 2020
@nodejs-github-bot

nodejs-github-bot commented Dec 22, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/35046/
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@PoojaDurgad
PoojaDurgad force-pushed the pri-validator branch from 81f7df1 to 5188055 Compare December 23, 2020 13:33
@nodejs-github-bot

nodejs-github-bot commented Dec 24, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/35063/
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
aduh95
aduh95 reviewed Dec 24, 2020
View reviewed changes
Comment thread lib/internal/validators.js Resolved

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@aduh95 aduh95 added the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. Only starts once the PR has an approving review. label Dec 28, 2020
@github-actions github-actions Bot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. Only starts once the PR has an approving review. label Dec 28, 2020
@nodejs-github-bot

nodejs-github-bot commented Dec 28, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/35127/
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@PoojaDurgad @aduh95
lib: use more primordials in shared validators
0538749 
PR-URL: nodejs#36552
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]>
@aduh95
aduh95 force-pushed the pri-validator branch from 64fbf93 to 0538749 Compare December 28, 2020 22:17
@aduh95
aduh95 merged commit 0538749 into nodejs:master Dec 28, 2020
@aduh95

aduh95 commented Dec 28, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Landed in 0538749
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
danielleadams pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 12, 2021
@PoojaDurgad @danielleadams
lib: use more primordials in shared validators
bb4f8c8 
PR-URL: #36552
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]>
@danielleadams danielleadams mentioned this pull request Jan 12, 2021
v15.6.0 proposal #36889
Merged
@targos targos added the dont-land-on-v14.x label May 25, 2021
@snyk-bot snyk-bot mentioned this pull request Sep 13, 2022
[Snyk] Security upgrade gatsby-plugin-sharp from 2.6.24 to 4.23.0 baby636/node#64
Open
@ron-a20 ron-a20 mentioned this pull request Sep 13, 2022
[Snyk] Security upgrade gatsby-plugin-sharp from 2.3.10 to 4.23.0 ron-a20/node#73
Open
This was referenced Sep 13, 2022
[Snyk] Security upgrade gatsby-plugin-sharp from 2.3.10 to 4.23.0 Rednickle/node-1#53
Open
[Snyk] Security upgrade gatsby-plugin-sharp from 2.3.10 to 4.23.0 aliceUnhinged613/node#66
Open
@wedataintelligence wedataintelligence mentioned this pull request Sep 13, 2022
[Snyk] Security upgrade gatsby-plugin-sharp from 2.3.10 to 4.23.0 wedataintelligence/node#40
Open
@snyk-bot snyk-bot mentioned this pull request Sep 13, 2022
[Snyk] Security upgrade gatsby-plugin-sharp from 2.2.13 to 4.23.0 kissofire/node#75
Open
@molllyn1 molllyn1 mentioned this pull request Sep 14, 2022
[Snyk] Security upgrade gatsby-plugin-sharp from 2.3.10 to 4.23.0 molllyn1/node#55
Open
@137717unity 137717unity mentioned this pull request Sep 14, 2022
[Snyk] Security upgrade gatsby-plugin-sharp from 2.3.10 to 4.23.0 137717unity/node#64
Open
@snyk-bot snyk-bot mentioned this pull request Sep 25, 2022
[Snyk] Fix for 22 vulnerabilities 137717unity/node#70
Open
@wedataintelligence wedataintelligence mentioned this pull request Sep 26, 2022
[Snyk] Fix for 22 vulnerabilities wedataintelligence/node#44
Open
@137717unity 137717unity mentioned this pull request Sep 26, 2022
[Snyk] Fix for 22 vulnerabilities 137717unity/node#73
Open
@snyk-bot snyk-bot mentioned this pull request Sep 27, 2022
[Snyk] Fix for 21 vulnerabilities Rednickle/node-1#56
Open
@wedataintelligence wedataintelligence mentioned this pull request Sep 29, 2022
[Snyk] Fix for 24 vulnerabilities wedataintelligence/node#50
Open
This was referenced Sep 29, 2022
[Snyk] Fix for 24 vulnerabilities 137717unity/node#75
Open
[Snyk] Fix for 23 vulnerabilities Rednickle/node-1#60
Open
This was referenced Oct 5, 2022
[Snyk] Fix for 24 vulnerabilities wedataintelligence/node#51
Open
[Snyk] Fix for 24 vulnerabilities wedataintelligence/node#52
Open
@snyk-bot snyk-bot mentioned this pull request Oct 6, 2022
[Snyk] Fix for 24 vulnerabilities wedataintelligence/node#53
Open
@137717unity 137717unity mentioned this pull request Oct 7, 2022
[Snyk] Fix for 24 vulnerabilities 137717unity/node#76
Open
@wedataintelligence wedataintelligence mentioned this pull request Oct 7, 2022
[Snyk] Fix for 24 vulnerabilities wedataintelligence/node#54
Open
This was referenced Oct 8, 2022
[Snyk] Fix for 24 vulnerabilities wedataintelligence/node#55
Open
[Snyk] Fix for 24 vulnerabilities 137717unity/node#77
Open
@137717unity 137717unity mentioned this pull request Oct 9, 2022
[Snyk] Fix for 24 vulnerabilities 137717unity/node#78
Open
@snyk-bot snyk-bot mentioned this pull request Oct 9, 2022
[Snyk] Fix for 23 vulnerabilities Rednickle/node-1#63
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@aduh95 aduh95 aduh95 approved these changes
@Trott Trott Trott approved these changes

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

author ready PRs with CI started, the required approvals, and no outstanding review comments. lib / src Issues and PRs involving general changes in the lib/ or src/ directories.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

5 participants

@PoojaDurgad @Trott @nodejs-github-bot @aduh95 @targos
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.
You are visitor 01402503 — GeezerVison does not store the pages you look up.
Best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.7 or Internet Explorer 6 at 800×600. No cookies required.