Unify NodeJS and browser implementation#672
Merged
EzraBrooks merged 2 commits intodevelopfrom Feb 5, 2024
Merged
Conversation
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
EzraBrooks
force-pushed
the
unify-nodejs-and-browser-implementation
branch
from
5b8174a to
10aadfd
Compare
EzraBrooks
added
the
v2
Contributor
Author
|
This is yet another thing that has become a hurdle in #665, since |
sea-bass
approved these changes
Feb 5, 2024
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
2 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Public API Changes
Description
Removing this Node-specific functionality that seems to be largely untouched in almost 10 years allows having one unified entry point into the codebase. This decreases the maintenance burden of the library and opens the door to swapping these transports out at runtime instead of at build-time; with ESM and dynamic imports, that is very doable - but would require a lot of rearchitecture to accommodate a
Promise-based async API for any functions that would use a dynamicimport(since that returns aPromise)