-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.8k
refactor(NODE-7313): only use dns.resolve for all types #4846
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
Open
durran
wants to merge
12
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
NODE-7313
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+150
−162
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
12 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
4e89a87
refactor(NODE-7313): only use dns.resolve for all types
durran e024ec6
test: stub only resolve
durran 3ade98f
test: fix gssapi tests
durran 38b46c1
test: fix initial dns seedlist test
durran 9b5b0a8
update sinon stubs
tadjik1 e7e43d3
make sure to check stubs with arguments
tadjik1 52aa2e9
run kerberos tests only
tadjik1 68008ba
fix kerberos tests
tadjik1 bb16669
run all tests
tadjik1 481b7b1
address typescript type comment
tadjik1 9a631da
fix typo in test
tadjik1 c342496
avoid ts casting
tadjik1 File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
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.
Can we choose an approach that doesn't necessitate casting? One approach would be something like:
Another would be modifying the function to instead accept a lookup function, which it then calls.
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.
@PavelSafronov I have updated this block using generics (basically map rrtype to response). please let me know if this works
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.
There's still a cast, it's just been moved to a different place
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
In my view it's essentially the same as you suggested, but with the different mechanism: generics vs. runtime if-else:
In other words, I don't want to add runtime check for the compilation step (it just feels wrong, however I'm not strongly against it).
Would you agree? Or is it casting in general that you would like to avoid?
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.
Casting in general. I don't feel terribly strongly, but if we have the capability to write this in way that doesn't require casting, I guess I don't see why we wouldn't?
Runtime checks to have a perf cost (although in general I think an if-statement is effectively negligable). But regardless, this is a factory, so the perf cost is once per module instantiation per function.
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.
agree! switched implementation back (with the resolve being defined with ternary condition)