feat(node/crypto): Stub out missing exports #2263
Merged
Conversation
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
cmorten
commented
May 24, 2022
| return ( | ||
| obj != null && (obj as Record<symbol, unknown>)[kKeyObject] !== undefined | ||
| ); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This file avoids circular deps issues.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Stub out the remainder of the
cryptomodule with the correct interfaces, invokingnotImplemented()if called.With the inclusion of the browserify directory into
deno_stdI suspect there are some methods which could already be implemented, but to narrow scope here I have opted for usingnotImplemented()more often than not.I have restructured the
cryptoimplementation somewhat to align with the Node directory structure ( see #1707 ) but have left thecrypto_browserifydirectory where it was as moving results in a ~250 file change which is probably best done as a chore in a separate PR to make for easier reviewing.This structural PR should hopefully pave the way to make implementing the following easier:
X509Certificateclass from node.js crypto deno#17851X509Certificatewithin hash module #981