-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30.1k
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
buffer: auto random fill Buffer(num) and new Buffer(num) #11806
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
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
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
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 +1,15 @@ | ||
// Flags: --pending-deprecation --no-warnings | ||
'use strict'; | ||
|
||
const common = require('../common'); | ||
const Buffer = require('buffer').Buffer; | ||
|
||
const bufferWarning = 'The Buffer() and new Buffer() constructors are not ' + | ||
'recommended for use due to security and usability ' + | ||
'concerns. Please use the new Buffer.alloc(), ' + | ||
'Buffer.allocUnsafe(), or Buffer.from() construction ' + | ||
'methods instead.'; | ||
|
||
common.expectWarning('DeprecationWarning', bufferWarning); | ||
|
||
new Buffer(10); |
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.
Part of the performance hit might be that this stops using pooled allocation. Is that intentional?
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.
Yes, but it needn't I suppose. This was largely just to keep it simple and consistent. If we happen to pull off the pooled allocation, do you imagine we would just zero fill or use the randomly selected value to fill?
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.
@jasnell The best way that comes to mind for me right now is to have separate pools for uninitialized & for random-filled Buffers … alternatively, we could just keep using
Buffer.allocUnsafe()
here and fill manually.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.
Yeah. I'm leaning in that direction to be honest (specifically, using
Buffer.alloc(size, fill)
). It would be much less disruptive and wouldn't require the underlying c/c++ change. I did it this way first to see what the perf would be like and it is way too much of a hitThere 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'm going to open a second PR that uses this other method. I'd like us to get some comparison benchmark runs on various platforms. Definitely think going with the alloc then fill in js is going to be the better option tho.