doc: improve documentation on argument validation #56954
Merged
+62
−0
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
nodejs-github-bot
added
c++
aduh95
reviewed
Feb 8, 2025
jasnell
reviewed
Feb 8, 2025
Aditi-1400
force-pushed
the
doc-update
branch
from
21efca9 to
3ee49f2
Compare
joyeecheung
approved these changes
Feb 11, 2025
aduh95
added
the
author ready
UlisesGascon
approved these changes
Feb 12, 2025
joyeecheung
added
the
commit-queue
nodejs-github-bot
added
commit-queue-failed
Commit Queue failed- Loading data for nodejs/node/pull/56954 ✔ Done loading data for nodejs/node/pull/56954 ----------------------------------- PR info ------------------------------------ Title doc: improve documentation on argument validation (#56954) ⚠ Could not retrieve the email or name of the PR author's from user's GitHub profile! Branch Aditi-1400:doc-update -> nodejs:main Labels c++, author ready, needs-ci Commits 1 - doc: improve documentation on argument validation Committers 1 - Aditi <aditisingh1400@gmail.com> PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/56954 Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <joyeec9h3@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Ulises Gascón <ulisesgascongonzalez@gmail.com> ------------------------------ Generated metadata ------------------------------ PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/56954 Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <joyeec9h3@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Ulises Gascón <ulisesgascongonzalez@gmail.com> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ℹ This PR was created on Fri, 07 Feb 2025 21:11:29 GMT ✔ Approvals: 2 ✔ - Joyee Cheung (@joyeecheung) (TSC): https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/56954#pullrequestreview-2610220323 ✔ - Ulises Gascón (@UlisesGascon): https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/56954#pullrequestreview-2611384161 ✔ Last GitHub CI successful ✘ No Jenkins CI runs detected -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ✔ Aborted `git node land` session in /home/runner/work/node/node/.ncuhttps://github.com/nodejs/node/actions/runs/13293370008 |
|
Oh boy, somehow the CI checker in ncu wants Jenkins to be run for src/README.md changes |
joyeecheung
added
request-ci
github-actions
bot
removed
the
request-ci
joyeecheung
added
the
commit-queue
nodejs-github-bot
removed
the
commit-queue
|
Landed in f208027 |
targos
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 17, 2025
PR-URL: #56954 Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <joyeec9h3@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Ulises Gascón <ulisesgascongonzalez@gmail.com>
acidiney
pushed a commit
to acidiney/node
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 23, 2025
PR-URL: nodejs#56954 Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <joyeec9h3@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Ulises Gascón <ulisesgascongonzalez@gmail.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR updates the documentation to clearly explain the approach used for argument validation in Node.js,
with respect to public APIs and internal code.
It wasn't very clear to me while trying to validate the argument in #56942, thanks to @joyeecheung for providing the additional context that was missing from the documentation. :)