Rewrite in N-API #5
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Wasn’t a pressing need, but I wanted some more practice at converting modules that use `nan`.
Author
|
(Because the diff removes a bunch of vendored files from source control, the meaningful N-API changes can't be seen in the web view. But you can view |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Now that we have a context-aware version of
git-utilspublished, this isn't a high priority, but I'm opening it anyway so it doesn't get forgotten on my hard drive.Almost a year ago, when I was going through all of our native modules and assessing the context awareness of each one, I rewrote this module using N-API, mainly just to get practice with N-API. It was a straightforward process and it gave me an opportunity to update some other dependencies.
Separately: @mauricioszabo indicated that his original reason for vendorizing
libgit2had something to do withyarn. It occurs to me that he was likely running into problems that were specific to howyarnhandled dependencies that were git repositories instead of NPM packages. But now that we have a package-publishing strategy, there should be no need for vendorizing, and we can return to the submodule strategy. (If I'm wrong, we'd have a perfectly good7.0.1release to fall back on in PulsarNext.)Anyway, to reiterate: this isn't a necessary part of the drive toward PulsarNext, but it solves a couple of long-term action items.