Skip to content
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

doc: fix description of N-API exception handlers #30893

Closed

Conversation

tniessen
Copy link
Member

The return value is not a boolean and even if interpreted as one, it does not indicate whether an exception is pending.

For napi_is_exception_pending, the description of the result parameter already explains how to check whether an exception is pending.

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • documentation is changed or added
  • commit message follows commit guidelines

The return value is not a boolean and even if interpreted as one,
it does not indicate whether an exception is pending.

For napi_is_exception_pending, the description of the result parameter
already explains how to check whether an exception is pending.
@tniessen tniessen added doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations. node-api Issues and PRs related to the Node-API. labels Dec 11, 2019
@Trott
Copy link
Member

Trott commented Dec 13, 2019

@nodejs/n-api

Copy link
Member

@NickNaso NickNaso left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

addaleax pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 14, 2019
The return value is not a boolean and even if interpreted as one,
it does not indicate whether an exception is pending.

For napi_is_exception_pending, the description of the result parameter
already explains how to check whether an exception is pending.

PR-URL: #30893
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Gabriel Schulhof <gabriel.schulhof@intel.com>
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
@addaleax
Copy link
Member

Landed in 8dea6dc

@addaleax addaleax closed this Dec 14, 2019
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 17, 2019
The return value is not a boolean and even if interpreted as one,
it does not indicate whether an exception is pending.

For napi_is_exception_pending, the description of the result parameter
already explains how to check whether an exception is pending.

PR-URL: #30893
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Gabriel Schulhof <gabriel.schulhof@intel.com>
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
@MylesBorins MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Dec 17, 2019
targos pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 14, 2020
The return value is not a boolean and even if interpreted as one,
it does not indicate whether an exception is pending.

For napi_is_exception_pending, the description of the result parameter
already explains how to check whether an exception is pending.

PR-URL: #30893
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Gabriel Schulhof <gabriel.schulhof@intel.com>
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
@tniessen tniessen deleted the doc-fix-napi-exception-description branch January 23, 2020 03:46
BethGriggs pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 6, 2020
The return value is not a boolean and even if interpreted as one,
it does not indicate whether an exception is pending.

For napi_is_exception_pending, the description of the result parameter
already explains how to check whether an exception is pending.

PR-URL: #30893
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Gabriel Schulhof <gabriel.schulhof@intel.com>
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
@MylesBorins MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Feb 8, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations. node-api Issues and PRs related to the Node-API.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants