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 — tools: increase maximum line length to 120 characters by Trott · Pull Request #41586 · nodejs/node

Conversation

@Trott

@Trott Trott commented Jan 19, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

No description provided.

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

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

bricss and ExE-Boss reacted with thumbs up emoji
All reactions
  • 👍 2 reactions
@Trott
tools: increase maximum line length to 120 characters
756efa7
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added the tools Issues and PRs related to the tools directory. label Jan 19, 2022
@Trott
fixup! tools: increase maximum line length to 120 characters
445eddf
targos
targos approved these changes Jan 19, 2022
View reviewed changes
This was referenced Jan 19, 2022
tools: remove ESLint max-len rule #41509
Closed
tools: disable max-len ESLint rule for strings #41536
Closed
@tniessen

tniessen commented Jan 19, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Alternative: #41509
Alternative: #41536

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

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

Mesteery
Mesteery approved these changes Jan 19, 2022
View reviewed changes
@tniessen

tniessen commented Jan 19, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Should this also apply to C++ sources and/or Markdown for consistency? (I'm not saying it's a good idea, but I am curious if the arguments for doing this in JavaScript are really specific to JavaScript.)

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

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

mcollina
mcollina approved these changes Jan 19, 2022
View reviewed changes

@mcollina mcollina 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

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

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

All reactions
@Trott

Trott commented Jan 19, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Should this also apply to C++ sources and/or Markdown for consistency? (I'm not saying it's a good idea, but I am curious if the arguments for doing this in JavaScript are really specific to JavaScript.)

I'd prefer to treat each one separately so that decisions about one don't get complicated by considerations that only apply in one of the other contexts.

It might also be good to treat this as an experiment. If anyone is hesitant about increasing the limit, then maybe they'd be comfortable with just trying it for a few months and then deciding if we've had to give a lot of line-length nits or not.

But here's my take anyway on C++ and markdown:

  • The last time I programmed C++ on anything more than an occasional as-needed basis was around 20 years ago so I don't have an opinion there.

  • I can go either way with Markdown, but I think I favor eliminating the line breaks there too. All the same IDE (and markdown editor) arguments apply, and the argument that it will greatly simplify diffs applies much more strongly for prose than for code.

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

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

jasnell
jasnell approved these changes Jan 19, 2022
View reviewed changes
BethGriggs
BethGriggs approved these changes Jan 19, 2022
View reviewed changes
@jasnell

jasnell commented Jan 19, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Increasing the c++ limit to 120 works for me.

bricss 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.

bnb
bnb approved these changes Jan 19, 2022
View reviewed changes
@bnb

bnb commented Jan 19, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Uh oh!

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

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I can go either way with Markdown, but I think I favor eliminating the line breaks there too. All the same IDE (and markdown editor) arguments apply, and the argument that it will greatly simplify diffs applies much more strongly for prose than for code.

Massively favor eliminating line breaks. In general, it seems that the ecosystem has adopted this as a standard, and it's extremely strange for us to be an outlier.

ljharb reacted with thumbs up emoji ljharb reacted with rocket emoji
All reactions
  • 👍 1 reaction
  • 🚀 1 reaction

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

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

@tniessen

tniessen commented Jan 20, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Massively favor eliminating line breaks. In general, it seems that the ecosystem has adopted this as a standard, and it's extremely strange for us to be an outlier.

On a side note, I suspect that most of the ecosystem doesn't need to backport documentation changes to multiple release lines with diverging commit histories, so they are probably less concerned about the increased number of conflicts and the reduced usefulness of git operations such as git blame.

targos 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 added the commit-queue PRs queued for automated landing through the Commit Queue. label Jan 21, 2022
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added commit-queue-failed PRs whose Commit Queue landing failed and need manual intervention before retrying. and removed commit-queue PRs queued for automated landing through the Commit Queue. labels Jan 21, 2022
@nodejs-github-bot

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@Trott Trott added request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. Only starts once the PR has an approving review. and removed commit-queue-failed PRs whose Commit Queue landing failed and need manual intervention before retrying. labels Jan 21, 2022
@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 Jan 21, 2022
@nodejs-github-bot

nodejs-github-bot commented Jan 21, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/42064/

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

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

@nodejs-github-bot

nodejs-github-bot commented Jan 21, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/42065/

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

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

@Trott Trott added the commit-queue PRs queued for automated landing through the Commit Queue. label Jan 21, 2022
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot removed the commit-queue PRs queued for automated landing through the Commit Queue. label Jan 21, 2022
@nodejs-github-bot
nodejs-github-bot merged commit 870044f into nodejs:master Jan 21, 2022
@nodejs-github-bot

nodejs-github-bot commented Jan 21, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Landed in 870044f

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

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

@Trott
Trott deleted the max-len-120 branch January 21, 2022 15:29
This was referenced Jan 22, 2022
CI Reliability 2022-01-22 nodejs/reliability#179
Open
CI Reliability 2022-01-23 nodejs/reliability#180
Open
CI Reliability 2022-01-24 nodejs/reliability#181
Open
CI Reliability 2022-01-25 nodejs/reliability#182
Open
BethGriggs pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 25, 2022
@Trott @BethGriggs
tools: increase maximum line length to 120 characters
57ada37
PR-URL: #41586
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Mestery <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Tierney Cyren <[email protected]>
@github-actions github-actions Bot mentioned this pull request Jan 26, 2022
CI Reliability 2022-01-26 nodejs/reliability#183
Open
26 tasks
@tniessen tniessen mentioned this pull request Feb 7, 2022
lib: add internal genericNodeError() function #41879
Merged
@ruyadorno ruyadorno mentioned this pull request Feb 8, 2022
v17.5.0 release proposal #41897
Merged
danielleadams pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 28, 2022
@Trott @danielleadams
tools: increase maximum line length to 120 characters
c346d78
PR-URL: #41586
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Mestery <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Tierney Cyren <[email protected]>
danielleadams pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 2, 2022
@Trott @danielleadams
tools: increase maximum line length to 120 characters
ad1d870
PR-URL: #41586
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Mestery <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Tierney Cyren <[email protected]>
@danielleadams danielleadams mentioned this pull request Mar 3, 2022
v16.14.1 release proposal #42200
Merged
danielleadams pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 3, 2022
@Trott @danielleadams
tools: increase maximum line length to 120 characters
a544321
PR-URL: #41586
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Mestery <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Tierney Cyren <[email protected]>
danielleadams pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 14, 2022
@Trott @danielleadams
tools: increase maximum line length to 120 characters
cdbe291
PR-URL: #41586
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Mestery <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Tierney Cyren <[email protected]>
@GeoffreyBooth GeoffreyBooth mentioned this pull request Oct 18, 2022
src: update cppline limit to 100 #45033
Closed
iamamanporwal added a commit to iamamanporwal/gexus-prod that referenced this pull request Aug 23, 2026
@iamamanporwal @claude
fix(deploy): flatten nested nf3 symlinks; never fail the build on Sentry
81881e6
The previous deploy (1cf105f) failed its own postbuild verification on
Vercel — correctly. On Linux, nf3 nests version-conflicted deps as symlinks
*inside* store packages (google-auth-library/node_modules/gaxios and 21
friends), and fs.cpSync({ dereference: true }) only dereferences the
top-level path: nested links are recreated as links (nodejs/node#41586), so
the "materialized" tree still dangled. Windows never showed it because nf3's
junction layout keeps every link top-level, which is exactly why the local
verification passed while Vercel's failed.

The copy is now hand-rolled: copyReal() stats through symlinks at every
depth, so the output contains none regardless of layout. Verified in a clean
node:24 container from a tarball of this tree: npm ci + VERCEL=1 build exit
0, 19 links materialized, `find -type l` = 0, and the function artifact
serves / at 200 and /api/available-models at 200 in the same container.

Also makes the Sentry sourcemap upload non-fatal via errorHandler. The
plugin's default is to throw and kill the build on any upload failure — a
wrong org slug, an expired token, a Sentry outage. Observability must never
take down a deploy. Exercised in the same container with deliberately
invalid SENTRY_* values: three 401s from Sentry, three warnings in the log,
build exit 0, and zero .map files left in the output.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@mcollina mcollina mcollina approved these changes
@jasnell jasnell jasnell approved these changes
@bnb bnb bnb approved these changes
@BethGriggs BethGriggs BethGriggs approved these changes
+2 more reviewers
@targos targos targos approved these changes
@Mesteery Mesteery Mesteery approved these changes
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Uh oh!

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

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

tools Issues and PRs related to the tools directory.

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.

9 participants

@Trott @tniessen @jasnell @bnb @nodejs-github-bot @mcollina @targos @BethGriggs @Mesteery
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.