-
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
doc: path.format provide more examples #5838
Conversation
I've run the tests to get into the habit of doing so and seem to be getting an error unrelated to any of my changes. If someone could confirm they are seeing something similar I'd be happy to create an issue. make jslint
make[1]: Entering directory '/home/john/projects/node'
./node tools/eslint/bin/eslint.js benchmark lib src test tools/doc \
tools/eslint-rules --rulesdir tools/eslint-rules
/home/john/projects/node/benchmark/http_simple_auto.js
16:13 error Strings must use singlequote quotes
35:19 error Strings must use singlequote quotes
44:12 error 'i' is not defined no-undef
44:19 error 'i' is not defined no-undef
44:26 error 'i' is not defined no-undef
45:25 error 'i' is not defined no-undef
77:10 error 'i' is not defined no-undef
77:37 error 'i' is not defined no-undef
77:46 error 'i' is not defined no-undef
78:28 error 'i' is not defined no-undef
78:38 error 'i' is not defined no-undef
✖ 11 problems (11 errors, 0 warnings)
Makefile:596: recipe for target 'jslint' failed
make[1]: *** [jslint] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/john/projects/node'
Makefile:115: recipe for target 'test' failed
make: *** [test] Error 2 |
Ready for review |
Regarding the benchmark tests failing lint, not your problem, it's #5359. I'll put together a fix now unless someone beats me to it. |
The fix has landed, so if you do a rebase against master, it should clear up the linting issue you had. |
OK, so looking at the change you made here, it's all correct, but I think it would be better to format the changes as if the So, for example, the value of
So maybe start with that output above and just delete properties as needed (and update your results, of course, as needed)? Is that clear? I hope I'm making sense... |
Makes perfect sense, I'll add in those changes. |
d2e55ae
to
42eabf7
Compare
I've updated with your suggestions. I used Would it be preferred that I squash all of my commits and explain what my change is in the squashed commit before having you review? |
5d4bfaf
to
a612f3d
Compare
Now is probably a good time to squash, yes. |
// `root` will be used if `dir` is not specified and `name` + `ext` will be used | ||
// if `base` is not specified | ||
// `root` will be used if `dir` is not specified | ||
// `name` + `ext` will be used if `base` is not specified |
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.
Nit: Would it help to put a period at the end of this line and the one above to make it clear that the subsequent line is a new sentence?
LGTM with nits that can be ignored if you disagree with them. |
I agree with the nits, I debated doing that. |
ba60503
to
4b0d410
Compare
Nits updated and commits squashed. |
/cc @nodejs/documentation |
LGTM |
LGTM Nit: Might as well add periods to the end of all the comment sentences and capitalize the first word (where it's not the name of a property!) for consistency. (And if not, then oh well, it will make a nice good first commit for someone else.) |
4b0d410
to
acfee9a
Compare
This change was to add upon the algorithm description of path.format by adding examples for unix systems that clarified behavior in various scenarios.
acfee9a
to
1cea17f
Compare
Sentences marked and typo fixed! |
LGTM |
This change was to add upon the algorithm description of path.format by adding examples for unix systems that clarified behavior in various scenarios. PR-URL: #5838 Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Roman Klauke <romaaan.git@gmail.com>
Landed in 820844d |
This change was to add upon the algorithm description of path.format by adding examples for unix systems that clarified behavior in various scenarios. PR-URL: #5838 Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Roman Klauke <romaaan.git@gmail.com>
This change was to add upon the algorithm description of path.format by adding examples for unix systems that clarified behavior in various scenarios. PR-URL: #5838 Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Roman Klauke <romaaan.git@gmail.com>
This change was to add upon the algorithm description of path.format by adding examples for unix systems that clarified behavior in various scenarios. PR-URL: #5838 Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Roman Klauke <romaaan.git@gmail.com>
This change was to add upon the algorithm description of path.format by adding examples for unix systems that clarified behavior in various scenarios. PR-URL: #5838 Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Roman Klauke <romaaan.git@gmail.com>
This change was to add upon the algorithm description of path.format by adding examples for unix systems that clarified behavior in various scenarios. PR-URL: #5838 Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Roman Klauke <romaaan.git@gmail.com>
Pull Request check-list
make -j8 test
(UNIX) orvcbuild test nosign
(Windows) pass withthis change (including linting)?
test (or a benchmark) included?
existing APIs, or introduces new ones)?
Affected core subsystem(s)
path
Description of change
Added examples for all cases of path.format for V5.9.0 on Linux.
Fixes #5747