doc: Document buffer.indexOf changes in v4.2.0 #3373
Conversation
| @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ The first Node.js LTS release! See https://github.com/nodejs/LTS/ for details of | |||
| - Added new `-c` (or `--check`) command line argument for checking script syntax without executing the code (Dave Eddy) [#2411](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/2411) | |||
| - Added `process.versions.icu` to hold the current ICU library version (Evan Lucas) [#3102](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/3102) | |||
| - Added `process.release.lts` to hold the current LTS codename when the binary is from an active LTS release line (Rod Vagg) [#3212](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/3212) | |||
| - Added new optional parameter `encoding` to `Buffer.indexOf`. Changed search algorithm from naive to naive + Boyer-Moore-Horspool. (Karl Skomski) [#2539](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/2539) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are we fine with retroactively changing the changelog like this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not really sure it matters either way.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No one's going to read that anyways, that's for sure. I'm feeling adding to the changelog after the release isn't quite right. Let's remove it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Intention from #3258 (comment) but I still need to do a PR for new.nodejs.org
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see. Still, I think the changelog train has left here.
To avoid such issues in the future: How about we add a relnotes label so people can tag changes that they feel worthy of being mentioned in a release? cc: @nodejs/release.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+1 on the relnotes label. I'm -1 on making this particular change tho.
|
Given the -1's on merging this, I'm inclined to close. Can open if someone feels it's necessary. |
|
@jasnell those were only for the changelog bit. The doc part is important. Reopening. |
|
Ah, right, completely forgot that the PR had the doc changes. @skomski if you can update the PR to just include the doc change that would be helpful |
| @@ -393,18 +393,31 @@ byte from the original Buffer. | |||
| // !bc | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| ### buf.indexOf(value[, byteOffset]) | |||
| ### buf.indexOf(value[, byteOffset, encoding]) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This should be buf.indexOf(value[, byteOffset[, encoding]]). If not then the implementation is wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually, since typeof byteOffset === 'number' and typeof encoding === 'string' the arguments should actually be indexOf(value[, byteOffset][, encoding]). Sorry about that.
|
@skomski ... ping... did you see the comments from @trevnorris ? |
|
Ping @skomski |
skomski
force-pushed
the
add-doc-buffer-indexof
branch
2 times, most recently
from
acc4698
to
8d142b1
Compare
skomski
force-pushed
the
add-doc-buffer-indexof
branch
from
8d142b1
to
9a5ce3c
Compare
|
Updated. |
|
Thanks. I'll land this after #4803. I incorrectly believed that |
| Strings are by default interpreted as UTF8. | ||
| Buffers will use the entire Buffer (to compare a partial | ||
| Buffer use [`Buffer#slice()`][]). | ||
| Numbers can range from 0 to 255. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this amount of linebreaks really necessary?
PR-URL: #3373 Reviewed-By: Trevor Norris <[email protected]>
|
Landed with whitespace changes, and made example match existing pattern, in 2bcea02. Thanks much! |
PR-URL: #3373 Reviewed-By: Trevor Norris <[email protected]>
|
@trevnorris this is not landing cleanly into the lts branch. We will likely need to see the changes from #4370 ported over before this can land. |
PR-URL: #3373 Reviewed-By: Trevor Norris <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #3373 Reviewed-By: Trevor Norris <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #3373 Reviewed-By: Trevor Norris <[email protected]>
PR-URL: nodejs#3373 Reviewed-By: Trevor Norris <[email protected]>
No description provided.