Skip to content

src: disallow constructor behaviour for native methods #26700

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
addaleax wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

src: disallow constructor behaviour for native methods #26700

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
df15ba3
src: disallow constructor behaviour for native methods
addaleax Mar 16, 2019
af88f41
fixup! src: disallow constructor behaviour for native methods
addaleax Mar 17, 2019
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
Prev Previous commit
fixup! src: disallow constructor behaviour for native methods
  • Loading branch information
@addaleax
addaleax committed Mar 17, 2019
commit af88f4157e8eea68e994018c755e021beb001f25
5 changes: 1 addition & 4 deletions test/parallel/test-process-chdir.js
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -46,7 +46,4 @@ common.expectsError(function() { process.chdir(); }, err);
// Check that our built-in methods do not have a prototype/constructor behaviour
// if they don't need to. This could be tested for any of our C++ methods.

@richardlau richardlau Mar 16, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This could be tested for any of our C++ methods.

Maybe it doesn't matter, but the one picked here means this isn't tested in Worker threads.

@addaleax addaleax Mar 16, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, I’d say it doesn’t matter – these things are pretty independent, and I’ve chosen something that is likely to stay a directly C++-backed method for a long time. I’m happy to take other suggestions, though.

@BridgeAR BridgeAR Apr 23, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Seems like this conflicted with #27224 😄

assert.strictEqual(process.cwd.prototype, undefined);
assert.throws(() => new process.cwd(), /not a constructor/);
// Make sure that the above checks verify the right thing, i.e. that we're
// actually looking at a directly exposed C++ binding method.
assert.strictEqual(process.cwd.toString(), 'function cwd() { [native code] }');
assert.throws(() => new process.cwd(), TypeError);