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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

doc: clarify that fs.exists() may return false for existing symlink #53566

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 26, 2024
Merged

doc: clarify that fs.exists() may return false for existing symlink #53566

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
5 changes: 4 additions & 1 deletion doc/api/fs.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -2736,7 +2736,7 @@ changes:
* `callback` {Function}
* `exists` {boolean}

Test whether or not the given path exists by checking with the file system.
Test whether or not the element at the given `path` exists by checking with the file system.
Then call the `callback` argument with either true or false:

```mjs
Expand All @@ -2753,6 +2753,9 @@ parameter, optionally followed by other parameters. The `fs.exists()` callback
has only one boolean parameter. This is one reason `fs.access()` is recommended
instead of `fs.exists()`.

If `path` is a symbolic link, it is followed. Thus, if `path` exists but points
to a non-existent element, the callback will receive the value `false`.

Using `fs.exists()` to check for the existence of a file before calling
`fs.open()`, `fs.readFile()`, or `fs.writeFile()` is not recommended. Doing
so introduces a race condition, since other processes may change the file's
Expand Down
Loading