doc: improve description of module exports#9622
Conversation
nodejs-github-bot
added
the
module
sam-github
force-pushed
the
improve-exports-alias-docs
branch
from
28b6e92 to
84b18c2
Compare
|
What about |
|
Above PRs/issues address specific comments you have made. Do you have more, or can we close this PR? |
|
Yes, seems |
|
And seems document this will make a break change. Cause of some third part tools set different values for |
|
Thanks for your patience again, open an issue in babel for asking |
doc/api/modules.md
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please avoid the use of informal pronouns such as you, your and us in the docs :-)
doc/api/modules.md
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For example, this last sentence is better written as: "Note, however, assigning a new value to exports causes it to no longer be bound to module.exports."
sam-github
force-pushed
the
improve-exports-alias-docs
branch
3 times, most recently
from
d2e5243 to
a5ee1d1
Compare
|
Thanks @jasnell, I removed the colloquialisms, and also fixed another bug in the require pseudo-code. Personally, I would remove the pseudo code in preference for the textual description and example, but maybe some other time, so it doesn't slow this PR. |
doc/api/modules.md
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
these should be wrapped in an explicit code block using the three backticks...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done, thanks, sorry for the churn, I'll be up to speed on current conventions soon.
sam-github
force-pushed
the
improve-exports-alias-docs
branch
2 times, most recently
from
0233696 to
472b2df
Compare
|
LGTM |
doc/api/modules.md
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this really widely used or a good practice?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wouldn't say it's universal, but I see it use fairly often as a defensive measure. I'd consider it a relatively good practice.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
|
@jasnell can you confirm I made your requested changes? |
sam-github
force-pushed
the
improve-exports-alias-docs
branch
from
472b2df to
e8f3290
Compare
|
@jasnell I don't want to merge while your review shows "requested changes" - I made the changes, can you confirm/LGTM? |
|
Thanks! |
- Do not use word alias, it isn't well defined - Fix return value of require() example, which confusingly was not the exported API as it should have been. - Fix the require() example, which claimed that the module exported `0`, when it exports `some_func`. - Describe best practice in keeping exports and module.exports bound together. - Describe why exports exists - Remove reference to magic, which is also not well defined PR-URL: nodejs#9622 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Stephen Belanger <admin@stephenbelanger.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
sam-github
force-pushed
the
improve-exports-alias-docs
branch
from
e8f3290 to
5887c2b
Compare
- Do not use word alias, it isn't well defined - Fix return value of require() example, which confusingly was not the exported API as it should have been. - Fix the require() example, which claimed that the module exported `0`, when it exports `some_func`. - Describe best practice in keeping exports and module.exports bound together. - Describe why exports exists - Remove reference to magic, which is also not well defined PR-URL: #9622 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Stephen Belanger <admin@stephenbelanger.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Do not use word alias, it isn't well defined - Fix return value of require() example, which confusingly was not the exported API as it should have been. - Fix the require() example, which claimed that the module exported `0`, when it exports `some_func`. - Describe best practice in keeping exports and module.exports bound together. - Describe why exports exists - Remove reference to magic, which is also not well defined PR-URL: #9622 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Stephen Belanger <admin@stephenbelanger.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Do not use word alias, it isn't well defined - Fix return value of require() example, which confusingly was not the exported API as it should have been. - Fix the require() example, which claimed that the module exported `0`, when it exports `some_func`. - Describe best practice in keeping exports and module.exports bound together. - Describe why exports exists - Remove reference to magic, which is also not well defined PR-URL: #9622 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Stephen Belanger <admin@stephenbelanger.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Do not use word alias, it isn't well defined - Fix return value of require() example, which confusingly was not the exported API as it should have been. - Fix the require() example, which claimed that the module exported `0`, when it exports `some_func`. - Describe best practice in keeping exports and module.exports bound together. - Describe why exports exists - Remove reference to magic, which is also not well defined PR-URL: #9622 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Stephen Belanger <admin@stephenbelanger.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Do not use word alias, it isn't well defined - Fix return value of require() example, which confusingly was not the exported API as it should have been. - Fix the require() example, which claimed that the module exported `0`, when it exports `some_func`. - Describe best practice in keeping exports and module.exports bound together. - Describe why exports exists - Remove reference to magic, which is also not well defined PR-URL: #9622 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Stephen Belanger <admin@stephenbelanger.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
7 participants
Checklist
Affected core subsystem(s)
doc
Description of change
doc: improve description of module
exportsReplace #9552
Fix #9552 (comment)