node/test/parallel/test-instanceof.js

'use strict';

require('../common');
const assert = require('assert');


// Regression test for instanceof, see
// https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/7592
const F = () => {};
F.prototype = {};
assert(Object.create(F.prototype) instanceof F);
test: add regression test for instanceof Add regression test for issue https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/7592. The issue was fixed in upstream V8 and this test case was previously added with a manual cherry pick for v6.x. Related to: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/7638 and https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/7592. PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/9178 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> 8 years ago			`'use strict';`
test: add common.noop, default for common.mustCall() Export a new common.noop no-operation function for general use. Allow using common.mustCall() without a fn argument to simplify test cases. Replace various non-op functions throughout tests with common.noop PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/12027 Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <riclau@uk.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Gibson Fahnestock <gibfahn@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Teddy Katz <teddy.katz@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com> 8 years ago
test: remove common.noop This change removes `common.noop` from the Node.js internal testing common module. Over the last few weeks, I've grown to dislike the `common.noop` abstraction. First, new (and experienced) contributors are unaware of it and so it results in a large number of low-value nits on PRs. It also increases the number of things newcomers and infrequent contributors have to be aware of to be effective on the project. Second, it is confusing. Is it a singleton/property or a getter? Which should be expected? This can lead to subtle and hard-to-find bugs. (To my knowledge, none have landed on master. But I also think it's only a matter of time.) Third, the abstraction is low-value in my opinion. What does it really get us? A case could me made that it is without value at all. Lastly, and this is minor, but the abstraction is wordier than not using the abstraction. `common.noop` doesn't save anything over `() => {}`. So, I propose removing it. PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/12822 Reviewed-By: Teddy Katz <teddy.katz@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Timothy Gu <timothygu99@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Gibson Fahnestock <gibfahn@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <refack@gmail.com> 8 years ago			`require('../common');`
test: add regression test for instanceof Add regression test for issue https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/7592. The issue was fixed in upstream V8 and this test case was previously added with a manual cherry pick for v6.x. Related to: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/7638 and https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/7592. PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/9178 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> 8 years ago			`const assert = require('assert');`


			`// Regression test for instanceof, see`
			`// https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/7592`
test: remove common.noop This change removes `common.noop` from the Node.js internal testing common module. Over the last few weeks, I've grown to dislike the `common.noop` abstraction. First, new (and experienced) contributors are unaware of it and so it results in a large number of low-value nits on PRs. It also increases the number of things newcomers and infrequent contributors have to be aware of to be effective on the project. Second, it is confusing. Is it a singleton/property or a getter? Which should be expected? This can lead to subtle and hard-to-find bugs. (To my knowledge, none have landed on master. But I also think it's only a matter of time.) Third, the abstraction is low-value in my opinion. What does it really get us? A case could me made that it is without value at all. Lastly, and this is minor, but the abstraction is wordier than not using the abstraction. `common.noop` doesn't save anything over `() => {}`. So, I propose removing it. PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/12822 Reviewed-By: Teddy Katz <teddy.katz@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Timothy Gu <timothygu99@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Gibson Fahnestock <gibfahn@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <refack@gmail.com> 8 years ago			`const F = () => {};`
test: add regression test for instanceof Add regression test for issue https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/7592. The issue was fixed in upstream V8 and this test case was previously added with a manual cherry pick for v6.x. Related to: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/7638 and https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/7592. PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/9178 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> 8 years ago			`F.prototype = {};`
			`assert(Object.create(F.prototype) instanceof F);`