Conversation
|
Hmmm ... it's not running the github actions. |
|
43c8535 to
82f7a42
Compare
82f7a42 to
f4a5a6e
Compare
|
Note for any reviewers: it can be worth using a more accepting For example: |
|
@jayaddison if only github would have the option. The only option they have so far is side-by-side diff and -w. |
|
@jayaddison good idea though. Do all the renames in the first commit, and then make changes afterwards. |
|
Copied from the PR I closed:
|
| typedef struct napi_escapable_handle_scope__* napi_escapable_handle_scope; | ||
| typedef struct napi_callback_info__* napi_callback_info; | ||
| typedef struct napi_deferred__* napi_deferred; | ||
| #define node_api_env napi_env |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think all of these defines need to be guarded by NODE-API version 8. Otherwise add-ons could fail to compile against versions of Node.js that support the NODE-API version they are targeting but don't have the new defines. I see adding these defines as the equivalent to adding new supported functions to NODE-API.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@mhdawson one concern is that NAPI_VERSION itself has to change so, going forward, people would be able to select API versions by defining NODE_API_VERSION themselves.
| /src/module_wrap* @nodejs/modules @nodejs/vm | ||
|
|
||
| # N-API | ||
| # Node.js API |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"Node.js API" seems like it will inevitably cause confusion. Is this the name that reached consensus in discussion? (I can't find the issue in the tracker. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong repository?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Trott I believe the name is still open for discussion at nodejs/abi-stable-node#420.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
node-api was what was being discussion to replace n-api and napi.
|
This PR is too big. I'll break it into several, starting with #37217. |
No description provided.