inspector: document bad usage for --inspect-port#12581
inspector: document bad usage for --inspect-port#12581sam-github wants to merge 1 commit intonodejs:masterfrom
Conversation
nodejs-github-bot
added
the
c++
doc/api/cli.md
Outdated
bnoordhuis
left a comment
bnoordhuis
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Needs tests. Also, I would handle it in node_debug_options.cc, not node.cc.
The only way to do that is to The structure of the code suggests to me that is not intended, but I don't understand why the debug options parsing was broken out into of the main option parsing loop in the first place. Because it was broken out into a function that returns boolean it can only indicate consumed/not consumed, and has no way of returning an error state. I could change the return to an int: 0 = consumed, 1 = not consumed, -1 means error -- but then how to return the specific error string? Add a return string arg, too? Seems a mess. |
Yes. There is at least one other exit statement in that file. |
|
IIRC I didn't document |
|
I think inspect-port is for use with SIGUSR1, ultimately, whereas --inspect=9999 will actually activate the inspector. |
|
node/src/node_debug_options.cc Line 29 in ef6a7cf exit(9)? What's with the 12? This and node_revert.cc seem to be the only uses of 12 in node, the other CLI arg errors I've found are 9.
|
|
Exit code |
|
@sam-github Rebase needed. |
sam-github
force-pushed
the
document-inspect-port-usage
branch
2 times, most recently
from
e779313 to
0a9a015
Compare
|
@bnoordhuis PTAL |
sam-github
force-pushed
the
document-inspect-port-usage
branch
from
0a9a015 to
8cf9130
Compare
|
argh, lint error if you don't require common, lint error if you require it and don't use it. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Instead of doing this, you can just write require('../common'); on the line 2 and don't assign the result of require anywhere.
Document --inspect-port, and fix the reporting for when it is misused.
The option requires an argument, but when the argument was omitted, the
error message incorrectly reported --inspect-port as being bad, as if
was not supported at all:
% node --inspect-port
node: bad option: --inspect-port
% node --none-such
node: bad option: --none-such
It is now correctly reported as requiring an argument:
% ./node --inspect-port
./node: --inspect-port requires an argument
sam-github
force-pushed
the
document-inspect-port-usage
branch
from
e45f7e5 to
4a773f5
Compare
|
OK, nice and green, @bnoordhuis |
Document --inspect-port, and fix the reporting for when it is misused.
The option requires an argument, but when the argument was omitted, the
error message incorrectly reported --inspect-port as being bad, as if
was not supported at all:
% node --inspect-port
node: bad option: --inspect-port
% node --none-such
node: bad option: --none-such
It is now correctly reported as requiring an argument:
% ./node --inspect-port
./node: --inspect-port requires an argument
PR-URL: #12581
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Document --inspect-port, and fix the reporting for when it is misused.
The option requires an argument, but when the argument was omitted, the
error message incorrectly reported --inspect-port as being bad, as if
was not supported at all:
% node --inspect-port
node: bad option: --inspect-port
% node --none-such
node: bad option: --none-such
It is now correctly reported as requiring an argument:
% ./node --inspect-port
./node: --inspect-port requires an argument
PR-URL: #12581
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Document --inspect-port, and fix the reporting for when it is misused.
The option requires an argument, but when the argument was omitted, the
error message incorrectly reported --inspect-port as being bad, as if
was not supported at all:
% node --inspect-port
node: bad option: --inspect-port
% node --none-such
node: bad option: --none-such
It is now correctly reported as requiring an argument:
% ./node --inspect-port
./node: --inspect-port requires an argument
PR-URL: #12581
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
|
I don't believe this is applicable to v6.x Please feel free to change label if I am mistaken |
9 participants
Document --inspect-port, and fix the reporting for when it is misused.
The option requires an argument, but when the argument was omitted, the
error message incorrectly reported --inspect-port as being bad, as if
was not supported at all:
It is now correctly reported as requiring an argument:
Checklist
make -j4 test(UNIX), orvcbuild test(Windows) passesAffected core subsystem(s)
inspector