doc: added note to fs.watchFile on previousStat#16099
Closed
niveditn wants to merge 3 commits intonodejs:masterfrom
Closed
doc: added note to fs.watchFile on previousStat#16099niveditn wants to merge 3 commits intonodejs:masterfrom
niveditn wants to merge 3 commits intonodejs:masterfrom
Conversation
Explains the expected behavior of previousStat in fs.watchFile() when a watched file disappears and reappears. Fixes: nodejs#15364
nodejs-github-bot
added
doc
jasnell
approved these changes
Oct 10, 2017
claudiorodriguez
approved these changes
Oct 13, 2017
doc/api/fs.md
Outdated
| In such cases the reappearance callback will not report the `previousStat` of | ||
| the file with all zeroes. This is the correct and expected behavior for | ||
| `uv_fs_poll_start()`, the libuv function that `fs.watchFile()` uses internally. | ||
|
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why this is documented under Appendfile, as opposed to watchFile?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@gireeshpunathil Corrected. Thanks for pointing that out! It would be great if you could please review again.
Note was previously mistakenly added under fs.appendFile() section. Now moved to correct position, under fs.watchFile(). The note explains the expected behavior of previousStat in fs.watchFile() when a watched file disappears and reappears. Fixes: nodejs#15364
gireeshpunathil
approved these changes
Oct 14, 2017
Member
bnoordhuis
approved these changes
Oct 14, 2017
doc/api/fs.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| In such cases the reappearance callback will not report the `previousStat` of | ||
| the file with all zeroes. This is the correct and expected behavior for | ||
| `uv_fs_poll_start()`, the libuv function that `fs.watchFile()` uses internally. |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This paragraph can be removed. The first sentence is redundant and the last sentence won't be relevant to most readers, they won't know or care it's implemented by libuv.
Removed last paragraph, as per suggestions. The note explains the expected behavior of previousStat in fs.watchFile() when a watched file disappears and reappears. Fixes: nodejs#15364
Member
|
Landed in 371d1db, thanks! |
joyeecheung
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 14, 2017
Explains the expected behavior of previousStat in fs.watchFile() when a watched file disappears and reappears. PR-URL: #16099 Fixes: #15364 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Claudio Rodriguez <cjrodr@yahoo.com> Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>
addaleax
pushed a commit
to ayojs/ayo
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 15, 2017
Explains the expected behavior of previousStat in fs.watchFile() when a watched file disappears and reappears. PR-URL: nodejs/node#16099 Fixes: nodejs/node#15364 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Claudio Rodriguez <cjrodr@yahoo.com> Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>
targos
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 18, 2017
Explains the expected behavior of previousStat in fs.watchFile() when a watched file disappears and reappears. PR-URL: #16099 Fixes: #15364 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Claudio Rodriguez <cjrodr@yahoo.com> Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>
MylesBorins
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 16, 2017
Explains the expected behavior of previousStat in fs.watchFile() when a watched file disappears and reappears. PR-URL: #16099 Fixes: #15364 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Claudio Rodriguez <cjrodr@yahoo.com> Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>
Merged
MylesBorins
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 21, 2017
Explains the expected behavior of previousStat in fs.watchFile() when a watched file disappears and reappears. PR-URL: #16099 Fixes: #15364 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Claudio Rodriguez <cjrodr@yahoo.com> Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>
MylesBorins
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 28, 2017
Explains the expected behavior of previousStat in fs.watchFile() when a watched file disappears and reappears. PR-URL: #16099 Fixes: #15364 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Claudio Rodriguez <cjrodr@yahoo.com> Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
8 participants
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.
Checklist:
make -j4 test(UNIX) passesFixes: #15364