-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.9k
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.
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
feat(resolver): Add NODE_PATH support #14089
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
tiny nitpick but this looks incredibly reasonable
can you add a test that checks that more than one NODE_PATH entries work?
26d5571
to
8e1f109
Compare
@paperdave Looks some github action configure was broken. Runner image is Ubuntu, but script try to call a ![]()
|
@paperdave Hi, is this pr ready to be merged? |
Any progress on this? |
im not sure why this didnt get merged before. i rebased it and will see how tests run. |
apologies for the delay. while i did rebase it with a linting error, fixing that error and running tests locally does not pass. so this cant merge as-is (and |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
see comment, failing tests
@paperclover Reedited! All test case passed in my fork. |
@paperclover Hello, this feature is very important for serverless environments, such as Aliyun serverless, we can use many build-in node_modules in docker image, by specify NODE_PATH to make it work. Many thanks 🙏 |
What does this PR do?
Add resolve check for
NODE_PATH
.How did you verify your code works?
I wrote automated tests
I included a test for the new code, or existing tests cover it
I ran my tests locally and they pass (
bun-debug test test-file-name.test
)I checked the lifetime of memory allocated to verify it's (1) freed and (2) only freed when it should be
I included a test for the new code, or an existing test covers it
JSValue used outside outside of the stack is either wrapped in a JSC.Strong or is JSValueProtect'ed
I wrote TypeScript/JavaScript tests and they pass locally (
bun-debug test test-file-name.test
)