doc: update async_hooks providers list

[addaleax]

Ref: #13452

Checklist

• documentation is changed or added
• commit message follows commit guidelines

Affected core subsystem(s)

doc/async_hooks

[refack]

I know it was there before but probably should to call -> to be called
Less sure but maybe correspond -> correlate
Correspond: have a close similarity; match or agree almost exactly.
Correlate: have a mutual relationship or connection, in which one thing affects or depends on another.

[addaleax]

I know it was there before but probably should to call -> to be called

Ah right, done.

Correspond: have a close similarity; match or agree almost exactly.

Well, that’s basically exactly what it’s supposed to say, so it seems like choosing correspond is perfect. :)

[trevnorris]

Don't agree with this changed for same reasons stated in #13452 (comment). Users should know what they can filter for from node core, and should also be able to find the same in documentation from module authors that create their own types.

[addaleax]

@nodejs/async_hooks … I don’t have terribly strong feelings either way.

[Fishrock123]

Why not update this rather than remove it? 😕

[refack]

Should we just expose process.binding('async_wrap').Providers?

[addaleax]

@trevnorris @Fishrock123 Seems like I misread the discussion in #13452 a bit. I’ve updated this to add Timeout and Immediate instead.

[mscdex]

Shouldn't Timeout and Immediate be uppercase or no?

[addaleax]

No, these values are emitted from JS and are written this way in the source code.

[jasnell]

It may be worth adding a note to point that out ... specifically, the all-caps ones come from native code while the mixed case come from JavaScript

[trevnorris]

Don't forget TickObject! 😄

[addaleax]

@trevnorris Added. :)

[trevnorris]

@refack

Should we just expose process.binding('async_wrap').Providers?

I'm down for that, but please expose it as types (or Types) instead. "Providers" is for legacy reasons and I never liked that name.

[refack]

I'm down for that, but please expose it as types (or Types) instead. "Providers" is for legacy reasons and I never liked that name.

Ref: #13610

[jasnell]

Landed in 0ab4614