Skip to content

lib: cache process.binding(…) wrappers #38132

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

lib: cache process.binding(…) wrappers #38132

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
da65d8a
lib: cache `process.binding(…)` wrappers
ExE-Boss Apr 7, 2021
b57a517
lib: cache `process.binding(…)` wrappers in `loaders.js`
ExE-Boss Apr 7, 2021
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
19 changes: 17 additions & 2 deletions lib/internal/legacy/processbinding.js
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -2,13 +2,14 @@
const {
ArrayPrototypeFilter,
ArrayPrototypeIncludes,
ArrayPrototypeMap,
ObjectFromEntries,
ObjectEntries,
SafeArrayIterator,
} = primordials;
const { types } = require('util');
const types = require('internal/util/types');

module.exports = {
const factories = {
util() {
return ObjectFromEntries(new SafeArrayIterator(ArrayPrototypeFilter(
ObjectEntries(types),
Expand All @@ -34,3 +35,17 @@ module.exports = {
})));
}
};

module.exports = ObjectFromEntries(
new SafeArrayIterator(
ArrayPrototypeMap(ObjectEntries(factories), ({ 0: key, 1: factory }) => {
let result;
return [key, () => {
if (!result) {
result = factory();
}
Copy link
Contributor

@aduh95 aduh95 Apr 7, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
if (!result) {
result = factory();
}
result ||= factory();

but do we want falsy or nullish?

Suggested change
if (!result) {
result = factory();
}
result ??= factory();

Copy link
Contributor Author

@ExE-Boss ExE-Boss Apr 7, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Arguably, it can just be return result ??= factory().

Copy link
Contributor

@aduh95 aduh95 Apr 7, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Arguably, it can just be return result ??= factory().

I don't know if we have a linter rule enforcing that, but I think we tend to avoid mixing assignments and return statements in the code base, to improve readability.

Copy link
Member

@RaisinTen RaisinTen Apr 7, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There are a couple of assignments in return statements:

$ git grep "return .* = " lib

Since this is a smallish statement, should we prefer return result ??= factory();?

Copy link
Member

@addaleax addaleax Apr 7, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Arguably, it can just be return result ??= factory().

I don't know if we have a linter rule enforcing that, but I think we tend to avoid mixing assignments and return statements in the code base, to improve readability.

Why would that improve readability?

return result;
}];
}),
),
);
2 changes: 2 additions & 0 deletions test/parallel/test-process-binding-util.js
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -28,3 +28,5 @@ assert.deepStrictEqual(
for (const k of Object.keys(utilBinding)) {
assert.strictEqual(utilBinding[k], util.types[k]);
}

assert.strictEqual(utilBinding, process.binding('util'));