Merged
Conversation
Contributor
Author
|
@tjmehta I think I used the appropriate |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
strange that we are calling newPort() here. But I can see that it works
Member
|
looks good to me |
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Though this looks like a large change, the quick summary is that it's a lot of cleanup, and not a lot of functional changes:
eslintinstead ofjshint. New config is in place, andnpm run lintis correctlodash! Functionality has been replaced by https://github.com/tjmehta/101 functionsiojs. Since it's around, we may as well support it... though I think it will only be on 'best effort' from our side...