-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.6k
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
esm: provide named exports for all builtin libraries #18131
Conversation
f4ea88b
to
90c22d0
Compare
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.
Only very lightly reviewed. No opinion on whether this is a good or bad change.
doc/api/esm.md
Outdated
foo.one === 1 // true | ||
``` | ||
|
||
Builtin modules such as will provide the above with the addition of their |
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.
Missing word after 'such as.'
tools/js2c.py
Outdated
var = name.replace('-', '_').replace('/', '_') | ||
if name.endswith('.js'): | ||
name = name.split('.', 1)[0] | ||
var = name.replace('-', '_').replace('/', '_').replace('.', '_') |
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.
var = re.sub(r'[\-./]', '_', name)
tools/esmgen.js
Outdated
@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@ | |||
const builtins = require('repl')._builtinLibs; |
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.
'use strict';
lib/internal/loader/ModuleRequest.js
Outdated
if (NativeModule.nonInternalExists(specifier)) { | ||
if ((/^node:/.test(parentURL) && | ||
NativeModule.nonInternalExists(specifier.replace(/\.js$/, ''))) | ||
|| NativeModule.nonInternalExists(specifier)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Operator should go on the previous line.
90c22d0
to
9000c54
Compare
👍 strongly for merging this. My only comment would be if there might not be a maintenance burden being created by this approach that might be mitigated with enumeration of the exports at load time, provided we can ensure we don't expose the wrong things (perhaps filtering |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've included my comments... hope you don't mind all the questions :)
lib/internal/loader/Loader.js
Outdated
@@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ class Loader { | |||
throw new errors.TypeError('ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE', 'url', 'string'); | |||
} | |||
|
|||
if (format === 'builtin') { | |||
if (format === 'builtin/esm' || format === 'builtin/cjs') { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why do we need two forms of builtin? Can the builtin/esm
not entirely replace the builtin/cjs
? What is the use case for retaining builtin/cjs
?
lib/internal/loader/ModuleRequest.js
Outdated
format: 'builtin' | ||
}; | ||
if (/^node:/.test(parentURL) && parentURL.slice(5) === specifier) { | ||
return { url: `${specifier}.js`, format: 'builtin/cjs' }; |
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.
When does this case ever happen?
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.
when the esm wrapper imports the actual cjs it looks like node:assert
requesting assert
, and thats the only time the builtin cjs should get used
tools/esmgen.js
Outdated
test.push(`check(${name}, ${key});`); | ||
} | ||
|
||
console.log(test.join('\n')); |
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.
Is the assumption that this file is run periodically to update the lib
folder? Is there a way to make this more automated? Why would you think this level of automation is preferable to runtime enumeration?
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.
hopefully it never needs to be used again, but i still included it since it might be useful at some point, maybe during a refactor or something in the far future
@guybedford i chose this over runtime enumeration because of the results in my last pr where i attempted forward evaluation but i guess if we can guarantee our libs won't have errors on evaluation it should be fine? i don't think our public api changes that much for it to be a real burden. this also lays groundwork for writing core parts of node in esm, although i don't know if that matters much to people. it should be noted that if we switch to runtime enumerating with out of order evaluation then the current issues i'm having with tests will also go away, and it will get rid of people who make loaders worrying about resolving both kinds builtins, which is definitely a confusing process. |
@devsnek thanks for clarifying. Personally I think the runtime creation would be better as it would avoid the need for the new builtin interpretation mode, remove the maintenance burden of maintaining the wrappers (generated or not), and it would effectively be exactly the same algorithm to build up the exports, saving an extra file load anyway to do that. |
@guybedford i just know there was significant opposition to out-of-order evaluation in my previous pr, but maybe @bmeck its fine in this case? |
Personally I don't seen an issue with considering core modules "preevaluated" (from the esm loader perspective). It's user dependencies with circular references and errors that we have to worry about for that issue. |
I don't like that the exports can go out of sync but am not blocking that at this point. I'd love it if the backing object could stay in sync for a variety of reasons, but all approaches I've tested are problematic for performance. |
@devsnek could you make the ESM facades eagerly populate even when required so that they stay the true primordial form of the exports? |
@bmeck i'm not sure what you mean by "true primordial form" but my method would basically be: loaders.set('builtin', async (url) => {
const module = InternalModule.require(url.slice(5));
const properties = Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(module);
const keys = ['default'];
for (const [name, prop] of Object.entries(properties)) {
if (!prop.enumerable || !prop.value)
continue;
if (/(^_)|(_$)/.test(name))
continue;
keys.push(name);
}
return createDynamicModule(keys, url, (reflect) => {
reflect.exports.default.set(module);
for (const key of keys)
reflect.exports[key].set(module[key]);
});
}); |
@devsnek I just want to be sure that if you mutate const fs = require('fs');
fs.readFile = () => {} import {readFile} from 'fs';
// should never be that noop function (even if this file is loaded after the one above) |
@bmeck i don't know of any way to guarantee at all, even requiring every builtin before user code runs and keeping a cache would still allow user mutation of the exports object. |
@devsnek the same sort of technique we use to eagerly inject CJS modules into the loader registry for this should work here for the core modules I think? |
(I know it's not pretty, but it provides the invariants) |
lib/assert.mjs
Outdated
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ | |||
/* eslint-disable no-restricted-properties */ |
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.
Just a thought... could we not devise a mechanism for generating these automatically during the build so we do not need to keep them manually in sync? The surface area of core modules is fixed at time of build.
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 we could somehow with static parsing maybe, but various things like getter/setters would need to be excluded.
lib/assert.mjs
Outdated
export const notStrictEqual = assert.notStrictEqual; | ||
export const throws = assert.throws; | ||
export const doesNotThrow = assert.doesNotThrow; | ||
export const ifError = assert.ifError; |
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.
This appears to be missing the new strict
export.
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.
it might not have been in my branch when i generated these, but since i'm changing this to generate the exports at runtime it shouldn't be an issue. (stay tuned!! 😄)
lib/crypto.mjs
Outdated
export const pbkdf2Sync = crypto.pbkdf2Sync; | ||
export const privateDecrypt = crypto.privateDecrypt; | ||
export const privateEncrypt = crypto.privateEncrypt; | ||
export const prng = crypto.prng; |
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.
We should decide if we really want to export pure aliases or take the opportunity to begin limiting access to those
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.
can you expand on the reason to limit access to things?
lib/domain.mjs
Outdated
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@ | |||
import domain from 'domain'; |
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.
Should we export deprecated modules 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.
+0 to removing them, not blocking on it
9000c54
to
43bfe9e
Compare
43bfe9e
to
e46ccb8
Compare
New approach looks good. |
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.
lgtm
lib/internal/bootstrap_node.js
Outdated
const descriptors = | ||
Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(nativeModule.exports); | ||
for (const [name, d] of Object.entries(descriptors)) { | ||
if (d.setter !== undefined || d.getter !== undefined || !d.enumerable) |
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.
what is "setter" and "getter"? Property descriptors have set
and get
.
e46ccb8
to
c63e761
Compare
f2627aa
to
e1770a2
Compare
lib/internal/bootstrap/loaders.js
Outdated
Reflect.defineProperty(target, prop, descriptor)) { | ||
update(prop, valueDescriptor.value); | ||
return true; | ||
} |
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.
👆 In the if (valueDescriptor &&
condition you can make it if (valueDescriptor) {
then inside the block capture the result of Reflect.defineProperty(target, prop, descriptor)
, call update
and return the captured result.
lib/internal/bootstrap/loaders.js
Outdated
if (this.namespace.includes(prop)) | ||
return false; | ||
return delete target[prop]; | ||
}, |
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.
👆 By returning false
you're making the CJS export objects non-delete
able. Instead you could allow the operation to happen, capturing the result of Reflect.deleteProperty(target, prop)
, calling update
, then returning the captured result. If a property is deleted its updated value is undefined
or whatever is exposed on its prototype.
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.
calling update
calling it with what exactly? the property is gone if we let it get deleted
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.
calling it with what exactly? the property is gone if we let it get deleted
Whatever the value of target[prop]
that's remaining.
a3284c6
to
2991f5c
Compare
lib/internal/bootstrap/loaders.js
Outdated
} | ||
return value; | ||
}, | ||
}); |
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 take a slightly different approach to wrapping. Instead of creating a new wrap
function, I proxy the original.
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.
Is there a reason why you would prefer that?
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.
@TimothyGu Yes. I first avoid wrapping for the 99% case (plain or bound functions) and then only wrap with a proxy for the native case. For the 1% case (native method) wrapping with a proxy lets all other traps passthru to the original function while I just hook the apply
trap.
Beyond the fact that less wrapping is good in general this is important to the esm
loader because folks can opt for CJS named export support beyond buitlins. Avoiding the function/proxy wrap means more methods are ===
to other references a user might store.
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'll have to re-audit our exports to make sure we only need to bind for native methods, but that does seem like a better case
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.
@jdalton your proxy unfortunately breaks in certain cases which i think could be a v8 bug so i'll keep using my wrap function for now
@nodejs/v8
> Reflect.apply(EventEmitter.call, EventEmitter, [])
TypeError: Reflect.apply is not a function
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.
@jdalton i wasn't running any esm, it broke regular usage of event emitter. it seems like v8 doesn't enjoy Function.prototype.call and Reflect.apply together, this isn't just an issue with EventEmitter.
var EventEmitter = require('events');
// probably some ghetto es3 function extending EventEmitter
EventEmitter.call(...);
i can special case the thisArg
variable like value === Function.prototype.call
but that feels nasty and the wrap works
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.
Dev error? Proxies should work.
Can you show how you attempted proxies. Might be able to spot the issue.
In my implementation
EventEmitter.call({})
works. The .call
is proxy wrapped.
I have smth like this for the handler (poke around the implementation here)
wrapper = new Proxy(value, {
apply(funcTarget, thisArg, args) {
if (thisArg === proxy ||
thisArg === entry.esmNamespace) {
thisArg = target
}
return Reflect.apply(value, thisArg, args)
}
})
When EventEmitter.call({})
is called the thisArg === proxy
condition is met because var EventEmitter
is the events
module module.exports
proxy. The thisArg
is set to the original target (the unwrapped module.exports
of events
). This results in a successful invocation.
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.
@devsnek Can you find an isolated reproduction of the bug? The following seems to be working just fine here:
$ node
> const { EventEmitter } = events
undefined
> Reflect.apply(EventEmitter.call, EventEmitter, [])
TypeError: Cannot set property 'domain' of undefined
at EventEmitter.init (domain.js:401:15)
at EventEmitter (events.js:27:21)
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.
@jdalton i copied yours in, except for using regular proxies instead of your OwnProxy, which i doubt makes any difference in this case
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.
ok i just came back to this and it seems like the proxy works now so i'm going to just assume i need more sleep... i'll push in a few minutes after some more testing
lib/util.js
Outdated
@@ -433,7 +436,7 @@ function formatValue(ctx, value, recurseTimes, ln) { | |||
return ctx.stylize('null', 'null'); | |||
} | |||
|
|||
if (ctx.showProxy) { | |||
if (ctx.showProxy && !nativeModuleProxies.has(value)) { |
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 don't think we should make a distinction between "our proxies" versus "their proxies".
We should either disable proxy showing by default, or just show the proxy.
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.
@TimothyGu It's cosmetic and can totally be tackled in a follow-up PR. The idea from earlier in the thread was that folks thought it would be less-good displaying the Proxy
prefix when inspecting builtin module exports in the repl.
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 like to argue in the other way: because it is cosmetic, this change can be done in a follow-up PR. Changes should be atomic and focused on one topic at a time.
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 like to argue in the other way: because it is cosmetic, this change can be done in a follow-up PR.
We're on the same page. I was saying that the masking of builtin exports could be done in a follow-up PR instead of this one 😁
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.
Oops 😛
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.
Good progress, but a bit more work is still needed.
Also, how much does this slow down require()
ing an internal module (and Node.js startup) from CJS with the --experimental-modules
flag turned on? We could get this in with a performance hit, but we need to be able to quantify that and know what to fix in the future.
lib/internal/bootstrap/loaders.js
Outdated
}, | ||
defineProperty(target, prop, descriptor) { | ||
if (Reflect.defineProperty(target, prop, descriptor)) { | ||
update(prop, Reflect.get(target, prop, target)); |
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.
Last , target
is unneeded.
const exports = NativeModule.require(url.slice(5)); | ||
reflect.exports.default.set(exports); | ||
}); | ||
const id = url.substr(5); |
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.
What exactly does this do? A comment would help with what exactly this truncates. Also we generally use .slice()
(substr
is part of Annex B).
@@ -1,10 +1,11 @@ | |||
import _url from 'url'; | |||
import { URL } from 'url'; |
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.
No need to import URL at all in Node.js v10.x :)
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.
you never know where this might be backported to
lib/internal/bootstrap/loaders.js
Outdated
this.namespace = Object.entries( | ||
Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(this.exports)) | ||
.filter(([name, d]) => d.enumerable) | ||
.map(([name]) => name); |
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.
Core code rarely use the functional array methods. Let's make this imperative instead.
this.namespace = [];
for (const key of Object.getOwnPropertyNames(this.exports)) {
const desc = Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(this.exports, key);
if (!desc.enumerable)
continue;
namespace.push(key);
}
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.
mfw thats what i was using before 😢 will change back
lib/internal/bootstrap/loaders.js
Outdated
const proxy = new Proxy(this.exports, { | ||
set(target, prop, value) { | ||
if (Reflect.set(target, prop, value)) { | ||
update(prop, value); |
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.
For consistency with defineProperty
, use update(prop, Reflect.get(target, prop))
. (This behavior is observable through getters/setters.)
lib/internal/bootstrap/loaders.js
Outdated
const methodWrapMap = new WeakMap(); | ||
|
||
const proxy = new Proxy(this.exports, { | ||
set(target, prop, value) { |
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.
set
hook has a fourth receiver
argument that you are not handling.
You need to at least make sure to forward the receiver
argument to Reflect.set
.
lib/internal/bootstrap/loaders.js
Outdated
} | ||
return false; | ||
}, | ||
get(target, prop) { |
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.
You need to handle receiver
here as well.
lib/internal/bootstrap/loaders.js
Outdated
wrap.prototype = value.prototype; | ||
methodWrapMap.set(value, wrap); | ||
return wrap; | ||
} |
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.
You might need to add this handling for getOwnPropertyDescriptor as well.
fs.readFile = () => s; | ||
|
||
assert.strictEqual(fs.readFile(), s); | ||
assert.strictEqual(readFile(), s); |
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.
Still need to test:
delete
delete
andset
afterwardsset
defineProperty
- All of the above, but with accessor properties
716aec6
to
c40ac4d
Compare
lib/internal/bootstrap/loaders.js
Outdated
for (const key of Object.getOwnPropertyNames(this.exports)) { | ||
const desc = Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(this.exports, key); | ||
if (desc.enumerable) | ||
this.namespace.push(key); |
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.
Instead of getOwnPropertyNames+enumerable
check you could use Object.keys
average startup time with child process + loop + without proxy (1000 runs) 79.71845515598729 i didn't bother testing time of an individual require because it can only happen at max once. its also worth nothing this increased time should be more than handled by snapshots, whenever we finish those. |
lib/internal/bootstrap/loaders.js
Outdated
|
||
if (typeof value.name === 'string' && /^bound /.test(value.name)) | ||
return value; | ||
|
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.
Besides non-functions and bound-functions you can also skip non-native functions.
I have an inference method here for reference. (a v8 helper for this would be rad++)
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.
we can't skip native functions. for instance if you do module.exports = new Map()
and we don't wrap the exports then Map.prototype.*
will have improper receivers and throw
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.
we can't skip native functions.
I know, I'm saying skip non-native.
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.
so the only functions we bind then are unbound native functions? what about member functions written in js
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.
so the only functions we bind then are unbound native functions? what about member functions written in js
We aren't binding functions. The wrapper juggles the thisArg
around for the one, maybe two, cases that cause native methods grief but beyond that we forward the thisArg
along. So it makes sense to only wrap the methods that need the thisArg
juggling in the first place (native methods).
lib/internal/bootstrap/loaders.js
Outdated
apply(t, thisArg, args) { | ||
if (thisArg === proxy) | ||
thisArg = target; | ||
return Reflect.apply(t, thisArg, args); |
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.
You might end up needing a thisArg === nsObj
check.
A test for calling a native method on the namespace object would cover it.
0975efa
to
cb20994
Compare
alright so this is the 400th comment in this thread and i'm starting to consistently get the github unicorn when loading this. at the moment it works and this pr seems to be ready. that being said, i need some approvals on this. i would love to land this by the end of next week. |
👍 As an initial landing of an experimental feature I think it's great. Every time I look at this implementation I find something in my own to improve! There are some things to dry-up and tweak here but they can be tackled in follow-up PRs. |
provide named exports for all builtin libraries so that the libraries may be imported in a nicer way for esm users: `import { readFile } from 'fs'` instead of importing the entire namespace, `import fs from 'fs'`, and calling `fs.readFile`. the default export is left as the entire namespace (module.exports)
cb20994
to
3aabe35
Compare
And, given that it's not a semver change (I think...), I believe there
should be no problem to land it?
…On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 2:26 AM John-David Dalton ***@***.***> wrote:
👍 As an initial landing of an experimental feature I think it's great.
Every time I look at this implementation I find something in my own to
improve! There are some things to dry-up and tweak here but they can be
tackled in follow-up PRs.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#18131 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAYnRN0X4rkV7THOoKvx1uxnqEepfnzRks5ttPq_gaJpZM4RdLYy>
.
|
this.exportKeys = Object.keys(this.exports); | ||
|
||
const update = (property, value) => { | ||
if (this.reflect !== undefined && this.exportKeys.includes(property)) |
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.
is it ok that delete Array.prototype.includes
can break this code?
If not, you could copy Array.prototype.includes
to be an own property on this.exportKeys
, perhaps?
(same question on has
/get
/set
on collection instances)
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.
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.
Fair point, just wanted to call it out :-)
NativeModule.require(id); | ||
const module = NativeModule.getCached(id); | ||
return createDynamicModule( | ||
[...module.exportKeys, 'default'], url, (reflect) => { |
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'm not sure if the ordering matters here at all - is default
always last?
https://tc39.github.io/ecma262/#sec-modulenamespacecreate step 7 suggests that all export keys, including "default" if present, should be alphabetically sorted. (i do see at least one test that validates the ordering, but i'm not sure if that test covers this code or not)
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.
the order doesn't matter there actually as it just gets injected into a generated source text
My greatest concern here is the potential 10% performance slowdown for NodeJS app startup having all core modules as proxies in CommonJS code, as Gus provided in some numbers at #18131 (comment). It may turn out that creating setter-based core modules could be an alternative to the proxy approach that is also faster, so I do think this would still be worth seriously considering, or at least comparing for performance. The benefit of a proxy over just a setter is supporting dynamic properties and object.defineProperty configuration cases. But dynamic properties are already not supported, so perhaps benefits may be worth the loss of configuration hooks. |
@guybedford as long as the experimental flag is around i'd rather take it as an opportunity to experiment with the behaviour rather than perf optimisation. come time to ship it we can always make it more performant if needed. i'm also exceedingly hopeful that we will finish up snapshots by that time and then we won't have to worry this at all |
There is an important distinction between experimentation that doesn't
affect legacy at all, and experimentation that creates a performance
regression for existing code. I really don't think a 10% reduction in
NodeJS startup time for existing codebases is a trivial matter to push
through. Yes lets move fast with the modules work, but let's not slow down
existing NodeJS apps in the process.
I'm also starting to get the unicorn for this page consistently - it is
probably worth closing this PR and opening a new one at this point I think
to reset discussion for review.
…On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 3:28 PM Gus Caplan ***@***.***> wrote:
@guybedford <https://github.com/guybedford> as long as the experimental
flag is around i'd rather take it as an opportunity to experiment with the
behaviour rather than perf optimisation. come time to ship it we can always
make it more performant if needed. i'm also exceedingly hopeful that we
will finish up snapshots by that time and then we won't have to worry this
at all
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#18131 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAkiykOyOSII3TlhpYZvz4DcudoJs4Sjks5ttcAKgaJpZM4RdLYy>
.
|
@guybedford this code doesn't run unless the flag is given, and yes i would agree a new pr is probably a good idea |
Docs-only deprecate the getter/setter crypto.fips and replace with crypto.setFips() and crypto.getFips() This is specifically in preparation for ESM module support PR-URL: nodejs#18335 Refs: nodejs#18131 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Guy Bedford <guybedford@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Jon Moss <me@jonathanmoss.me> Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <michael_dawson@ca.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
Runtime deprecate the crypto.DEFAULT_ENCODING property. This is specifically in preparation for eventual ESM support Refs: nodejs#18131 PR-URL: nodejs#18333 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net> Reviewed-By: Сковорода Никита Андреевич <chalkerx@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Minwoo Jung <minwoo@nodesource.com> Reviewed-By: Tobias Nießen <tniessen@tnie.de>
Docs-only deprecate the getter/setter crypto.fips and replace with crypto.setFips() and crypto.getFips() This is specifically in preparation for ESM module support PR-URL: nodejs#18335 Refs: nodejs#18131 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Guy Bedford <guybedford@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Jon Moss <me@jonathanmoss.me> Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <michael_dawson@ca.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
provide named exports for all builtin libraries so that the libraries may be
imported in a nicer way for esm users:
import { readFile } from 'fs'
instead of importing the entire namespace,
import fs from 'fs'
, andcalling
fs.readFile
Checklist
make -j4 test
(UNIX), orvcbuild test
(Windows) passes