process: deprecate process assert #18666

BridgeAR · 2018-02-09T00:08:36Z

This was never documented and the assert module should be used instead. So let us just deprecate this.

Checklist

make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
tests and/or benchmarks are included
documentation is changed or added
commit message follows commit guidelines

Affected core subsystem(s)

process

BridgeAR · 2018-02-09T00:12:25Z

CI https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/13049/

cjihrig · 2018-02-09T01:43:13Z

If this is going to be removed, I don't think it makes sense to also swap out the underlying assertion function.

BridgeAR · 2018-02-09T01:49:10Z

@cjihrig the reason why I did this is because there are still two assert calls in there and it is semver-major anyway. But I can keep the function as it was before if you prefer that.

cjihrig · 2018-02-09T02:13:08Z

I'd prefer leaving the implementation as is, but I'm fine with deprecating. Should probably run CITGM just in case.

addaleax · 2018-02-09T08:39:33Z

So let us just deprecate this.

But why? Continuing to support it indefinitely is basically free.

bnoordhuis · 2018-02-09T09:26:12Z

It's also used quite a bit out in the wild. I don't feel strongly about it but I don't see a compelling reason to deprecate it, except maybe for OOWTDI (Only One Way To Do It.)

BridgeAR · 2018-02-09T15:59:39Z

I rebased due to conflicts and addressed the comment to keep the old function in place.

I personally definitely prefer OOWTDI, especially because this is much more limited than the assert module.

BridgeAR · 2018-02-09T16:00:07Z

New CI https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/13063/

mcollina

LGTM

addaleax · 2018-02-09T16:02:52Z

I personally definitely prefer OOWTDI, especially because this is much more limited than the assert module.

I remember @bnoordhuis saying some time that that’s what documentation deprecations are there for, and I still agree with that. ;)

BridgeAR · 2018-02-09T16:22:37Z

Light-CI https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-light/244/ (enough to test this change)
CITGM https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js-citgm/job/citgm-smoker/1270/

@addaleax I personally think it would be better to get the code ported to newer one and if it is once implemented, people will probably not realize that it is there.
I personally also feel like doc only deprecations only make sense in case the deprecated code was documented before and that is not the case here. Almost no one is ever going to check the deprecation list for such things.

apapirovski

I'm in favour of this. I don't really like having a random function on the process object that seems to do a fraction of what the actual assert.ok does. Esp since it's not even documented...

addaleax · 2018-02-09T16:53:46Z

Taking the more general discussion here to #18682.

Fwiw, my personal preference would be process.assert = assert.ok;, or as an non-enumerable property if we do want to hide it.

apapirovski · 2018-02-09T17:18:48Z

Just to be clear, process.assert was deprecated back in 0.3.7. That's 7 years ago. I see no harm in a runtime deprecation and eventual removal. It's been long enough. Pretty sure the only reason it's still here is because most maintainers don't even know it exists. That's not, in any way, a good thing.

ChALkeR

LGTM. Usage is really low.

ChALkeR · 2018-02-10T01:55:15Z

Grep for process\.assert (data from 2017-08-02 😢):

chrome-js-0.2.0.tgz/tests/src/test-NodeWebKit-Service.coffee:37:      nodeWebKit.process.assert_Is_Object()
nwr-0.1.8.tgz/tests/src/test-NodeWebKit-Service.coffee:37:      nodeWebKit.process.assert_Is_Object()
binomial-hash-list-4.1.4.tgz/ranges.js:4:var assert = process.assert
biojs-vis-blast-0.1.5.tgz/node/src/node.js:261:    assert = process.assert = function(x, msg) {
cessnalibjs-0.0.30.tgz/node.js:298:    assert = process.assert = function(x, msg) {
changesets-1.0.2.tgz/test.js:20:process.assert(textFinal_2 === 'Good day treasured adventurers, y\'all!')
flush-all-0.1.1.tgz/node-v0.13/src/node.js:277:    assert = process.assert = function(x, msg) {
gzip-stack-1.0.0.tgz/gzip-stack.js:17:    process.assert(compression >= 1 && compression <= 9);
kinto-9.0.2.tgz/blah/union/examples/simple/middleware/gzip-encode.js:14:    process.assert(compression >= 1 && compression <= 9);
nltk-0.0.1.tgz/test/ngram.js:5:process.assert(tri.enum(str).length === str.length - 2 + 1);
persha-0.2.3.tgz/node-lib/node.js:263:    assert = process.assert = function(x, msg) {
pezhu-0.0.0.tgz/Downloads/node-v0.9.11/src/node.js:285:    assert = process.assert = function(x, msg) {
pn-1.0.0.tgz/process.js:27:  assert: { enumerable: true, value: bind(process, process.assert) },
portable-js-0.0.3.tgz/misc/node/node.js:264:        assert = process.assert = function(x, msg) {
postgres-0.0.1.tgz/postgres.js:32:    process.assert(c.currentQuery);
tempisfugit-0.0.1.tgz/lib/types/commit.js:2:    assert = process.assert;
union-0.4.6.tgz/examples/simple/middleware/gzip-encode.js:14:    process.assert(compression >= 1 && compression <= 9);

And half of those is from Node.js copies, tests, or examples, others are abadoned and unused.

I don't see a reason for not runtime-deprecating it.
Runtime-deprecating is positive not only because it is a step forward removing obsolete code, but also because we better do that before someone accidentially starts to use it in a popular package and then we break/change/remove it (as it's an undocumented feature).

devsnek · 2018-02-10T01:58:45Z

@ChALkeR unrelated to this pr, how do you grep packages like that

ChALkeR · 2018-02-10T02:00:49Z

@devsnek Gzemnid. I intend to move it to the org (#7935), but it is a bit stuck there…

ChALkeR · 2018-02-10T02:03:04Z

@devsnek I also upload grep-able datasets to http://oserv.org/npm/Gzemnid/, but that server is out of free space currently…

BridgeAR · 2018-02-10T12:35:03Z

Rebased due to conflicts.

@addaleax is it OK for you if this lands as is or do you want to give a explicit -1?

addaleax · 2018-02-10T14:03:36Z

@BridgeAR I would prefer to wait until #18682 is resolved, yes.

(Edit: I’m not putting a real -1 on this because of @ChALkeR’s Gzemnid run.)

BridgeAR · 2018-02-10T14:11:51Z

Sure :-)

Fishrock123

I'm ok with moving forward if the analysis is that usage is very low.

BridgeAR · 2018-02-14T16:06:05Z

@addaleax if I understand your update correct, you are now fine if this lands?

addaleax · 2018-02-14T20:38:17Z

@BridgeAR Well, I’m not a fan, but I’m not going to block this either…

This was never documented and the `assert` module should be used instead.

BridgeAR · 2018-02-16T15:06:55Z

New CI before landing https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/13204/ (I rebased due to deprecations.md conflicts).

This was never documented and the `assert` module should be used instead. PR-URL: nodejs#18666 Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Anatoli Papirovski <apapirovski@mac.com> Reviewed-By: Сковорода Никита Андреевич <chalkerx@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>

BridgeAR · 2018-02-16T16:23:00Z

Landed in 703e37c

This was never documented and the `assert` module should be used instead. PR-URL: nodejs#18666 Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Anatoli Papirovski <apapirovski@mac.com> Reviewed-By: Сковорода Никита Андреевич <chalkerx@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>

nodejs-github-bot added the process Issues and PRs related to the process subsystem. label Feb 9, 2018

BridgeAR added the semver-major PRs that contain breaking changes and should be released in the next major version. label Feb 9, 2018

BridgeAR force-pushed the deprecate-process-assert branch from ba1c28c to a17869a Compare February 9, 2018 15:58

BridgeAR requested a review from a team February 9, 2018 16:00

mcollina approved these changes Feb 9, 2018

View reviewed changes

apapirovski approved these changes Feb 9, 2018

View reviewed changes

BridgeAR requested a review from a team February 10, 2018 01:41

ChALkeR approved these changes Feb 10, 2018

View reviewed changes

BridgeAR force-pushed the deprecate-process-assert branch from 609f887 to 0359b63 Compare February 10, 2018 12:33

BridgeAR added the blocked PRs that are blocked by other issues or PRs. label Feb 10, 2018

Fishrock123 approved these changes Feb 10, 2018

View reviewed changes

jasnell approved these changes Feb 13, 2018

View reviewed changes

BridgeAR added author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. and removed blocked PRs that are blocked by other issues or PRs. labels Feb 15, 2018

process: deprecate process.assert()

af70bb6

This was never documented and the `assert` module should be used instead.

BridgeAR force-pushed the deprecate-process-assert branch from 0359b63 to af70bb6 Compare February 16, 2018 15:06

BridgeAR closed this Feb 16, 2018

BridgeAR deleted the deprecate-process-assert branch April 1, 2019 23:38

This was referenced Mar 7, 2020

[Snyk] Security upgrade gatsby from 2.13.73 to 2.16.2 meghasfdc/node#4

Open

[Snyk] Security upgrade gatsby from 2.13.73 to 2.16.2 kissofire/node#3

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

process: deprecate process assert #18666

process: deprecate process assert #18666

BridgeAR commented Feb 9, 2018

BridgeAR commented Feb 9, 2018

cjihrig commented Feb 9, 2018

BridgeAR commented Feb 9, 2018

cjihrig commented Feb 9, 2018

addaleax commented Feb 9, 2018

bnoordhuis commented Feb 9, 2018

BridgeAR commented Feb 9, 2018

BridgeAR commented Feb 9, 2018

mcollina left a comment

addaleax commented Feb 9, 2018

BridgeAR commented Feb 9, 2018

apapirovski left a comment

addaleax commented Feb 9, 2018

apapirovski commented Feb 9, 2018

ChALkeR left a comment

ChALkeR commented Feb 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading

devsnek commented Feb 10, 2018

ChALkeR commented Feb 10, 2018

ChALkeR commented Feb 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading

BridgeAR commented Feb 10, 2018

addaleax commented Feb 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading

BridgeAR commented Feb 10, 2018

Fishrock123 left a comment

BridgeAR commented Feb 14, 2018

addaleax commented Feb 14, 2018

BridgeAR commented Feb 16, 2018

BridgeAR commented Feb 16, 2018

process: deprecate process assert #18666

process: deprecate process assert #18666

Conversation

BridgeAR commented Feb 9, 2018

Checklist

Affected core subsystem(s)

BridgeAR commented Feb 9, 2018

cjihrig commented Feb 9, 2018

BridgeAR commented Feb 9, 2018

cjihrig commented Feb 9, 2018

addaleax commented Feb 9, 2018

bnoordhuis commented Feb 9, 2018

BridgeAR commented Feb 9, 2018

BridgeAR commented Feb 9, 2018

mcollina left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

addaleax commented Feb 9, 2018

BridgeAR commented Feb 9, 2018

apapirovski left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

addaleax commented Feb 9, 2018

apapirovski commented Feb 9, 2018

ChALkeR left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ChALkeR commented Feb 10, 2018 • edited Loading

devsnek commented Feb 10, 2018

ChALkeR commented Feb 10, 2018

ChALkeR commented Feb 10, 2018 • edited Loading

BridgeAR commented Feb 10, 2018

addaleax commented Feb 10, 2018 • edited Loading

BridgeAR commented Feb 10, 2018

Fishrock123 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

BridgeAR commented Feb 14, 2018

addaleax commented Feb 14, 2018

BridgeAR commented Feb 16, 2018

BridgeAR commented Feb 16, 2018

ChALkeR commented Feb 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading

ChALkeR commented Feb 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading

addaleax commented Feb 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading