labels
Oct 29, 2019
Instead of exposing the C++ bindings object as `subprocess.channel` or `process.channel`, provide the “control” object that was previously used internally as the public-facing variant of it. This should be better than returning the raw pipe object, and matches the original intention (when the `channel` property was first added) of providing a proper way to `.ref()` or `.unref()` the channel. Refs: nodejs#9322 Refs: nodejs#9313
and removed review wanted
PRs that need reviews.labels
Jan 3, 2020BridgeAR pushed a commit that referenced this pull request
Jan 3, 2020
Instead of exposing the C++ bindings object as `subprocess.channel` or `process.channel`, provide the “control” object that was previously used internally as the public-facing variant of it. This should be better than returning the raw pipe object, and matches the original intention (when the `channel` property was first added) of providing a proper way to `.ref()` or `.unref()` the channel. PR-URL: #30165 Refs: #9322 Refs: #9313 Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com> Reviewed-By: Denys Otrishko <shishugi@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>