Backport 8174 (symbol-based custom inspection methods)#8437
Closed
addaleax wants to merge 4 commits intonodejs:v6.x-stagingfrom
Closed
Backport 8174 (symbol-based custom inspection methods)#8437addaleax wants to merge 4 commits intonodejs:v6.x-stagingfrom
addaleax wants to merge 4 commits intonodejs:v6.x-stagingfrom
Conversation
* favor `assert.strictEqual()` and friends of `assert.equal()` etc. * favor `.includes()` over `.indexOf()` for existence checks PR-URL: nodejs#8189 Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <mic.besace@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Add a `util.inspect.custom` Symbol which can be used to customize `util.inspect()` output. Providing `obj[util.inspect.custom]` works like providing `obj.inspect`, except that the former allows avoiding name clashes with other `inspect()` methods. Fixes: nodejs#8071 PR-URL: nodejs#8174 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <mic.besace@gmail.com>
steal a line from nodejs#7207 to make things work
If a custom inspection function returned `this`, use that value for further formatting instead of going into infinite recursion. This is particularly useful when combined with `util.inspect.custom` because returning `this` from such a method makes it easy to have an `inspect()` function that is ignored by `util.inspect` without actually having to provide an alternative for custom inspection. PR-URL: nodejs#8174 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <mic.besace@gmail.com>
nodejs-github-bot
added
buffer
Member
Author
|
New CI, the last one got stuck: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit/4956/ |
bnoordhuis
added
the
semver-minor
Member
|
LGTM |
Fishrock123
pushed a commit
to Fishrock123/node
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 8, 2016
* favor `assert.strictEqual()` and friends of `assert.equal()` etc. * favor `.includes()` over `.indexOf()` for existence checks PR-URL: nodejs#8189 Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <mic.besace@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> PR-URL: nodejs#8437 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com>
Fishrock123
pushed a commit
to Fishrock123/node
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 8, 2016
Add a `util.inspect.custom` Symbol which can be used to customize `util.inspect()` output. Providing `obj[util.inspect.custom]` works like providing `obj.inspect`, except that the former allows avoiding name clashes with other `inspect()` methods. Fixes: nodejs#8071 PR-URL: nodejs#8174 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <mic.besace@gmail.com> PR-URL: nodejs#8437 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com>
Fishrock123
pushed a commit
to Fishrock123/node
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 8, 2016
steal a line from nodejs#7207 to make things work PR-URL: nodejs#8437 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com>
Fishrock123
pushed a commit
to Fishrock123/node
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 8, 2016
If a custom inspection function returned `this`, use that value for further formatting instead of going into infinite recursion. This is particularly useful when combined with `util.inspect.custom` because returning `this` from such a method makes it easy to have an `inspect()` function that is ignored by `util.inspect` without actually having to provide an alternative for custom inspection. PR-URL: nodejs#8174 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <mic.besace@gmail.com> PR-URL: nodejs#8437 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com>
Contributor
|
Thanks, CI seems green enough and fixes my problem so landed in Fishrock123/node@f829660...f19bf16 |
Contributor
|
Err, make that f829660...f19bf16 on the actual repo here |
Fishrock123
pushed a commit
to Fishrock123/node
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 8, 2016
* favor `assert.strictEqual()` and friends of `assert.equal()` etc. * favor `.includes()` over `.indexOf()` for existence checks PR-URL: nodejs#8189 Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <mic.besace@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Refs: nodejs#8437 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com>
Fishrock123
pushed a commit
to Fishrock123/node
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 8, 2016
Add a `util.inspect.custom` Symbol which can be used to customize `util.inspect()` output. Providing `obj[util.inspect.custom]` works like providing `obj.inspect`, except that the former allows avoiding name clashes with other `inspect()` methods. Fixes: nodejs#8071 PR-URL: nodejs#8174 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <mic.besace@gmail.com> Refs: nodejs#8437 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com>
Fishrock123
pushed a commit
to Fishrock123/node
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 8, 2016
steal a line from nodejs#7207 to make things work PR-URL: nodejs#8437 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com>
Fishrock123
pushed a commit
to Fishrock123/node
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 8, 2016
If a custom inspection function returned `this`, use that value for further formatting instead of going into infinite recursion. This is particularly useful when combined with `util.inspect.custom` because returning `this` from such a method makes it easy to have an `inspect()` function that is ignored by `util.inspect` without actually having to provide an alternative for custom inspection. PR-URL: nodejs#8174 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <mic.besace@gmail.com> Refs: nodejs#8437 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com>
Contributor
|
now f829660...c21bfae as I fixed a thing |
Closed
Fishrock123
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 9, 2016
Add a `util.inspect.custom` Symbol which can be used to customize `util.inspect()` output. Providing `obj[util.inspect.custom]` works like providing `obj.inspect`, except that the former allows avoiding name clashes with other `inspect()` methods. Fixes: #8071 PR-URL: #8174 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <mic.besace@gmail.com> Refs: #8437 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com>
Fishrock123
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 9, 2016
If a custom inspection function returned `this`, use that value for further formatting instead of going into infinite recursion. This is particularly useful when combined with `util.inspect.custom` because returning `this` from such a method makes it easy to have an `inspect()` function that is ignored by `util.inspect` without actually having to provide an alternative for custom inspection. PR-URL: #8174 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <mic.besace@gmail.com> Refs: #8437 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com>
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
6 participants
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.
Backport #8189 (because the rest depends on that) and #8174, with one
require()line added that is present in master but missing in v6.x./cc @Fishrock123