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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Somehow this sounds a bit harsh to me. Would you be fine to change it to something like
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.
i kinda want it to be harsh, there's a reason stuff like
internalBinding
has to be a thing nowThere 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.
With your comment in place as is I would argue that landing #17576 as new default without putting it behind a option could be done as a semver-patch. And I do not see that at all.
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.
I'd rather we be harsher in the docs , but more conservative when actually landing possibly breaking PRs, so +1 on keeping this wording, but making #17576
major
.Realistically we know that if enough people depend on the output of
util.inspect
, no matter how internal, we won't be able to change it. But if this warning helps dissuade people from relying on that output, then that seems like a good thing.Also if this PR makes #17576 a patch, that would make this PR semver-major 😁 .