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

buffer: use correct name for custom inspect symbol #9289

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

buffer: use correct name for custom inspect symbol #9289

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

charmander
Copy link
Contributor

Checklist
  • make -j8 test passes (in only 3 hours!)
  • tests and/or benchmarks are included
  • commit message follows commit guidelines
Affected core subsystem(s)

buffer

Description of change

59714cb introduced the util.inspect.custom symbol, but it was exported as customInspectSymbol by internal/util.js and referenced as inspectSymbol by buffer.js.

59714cb introduced the
`util.inspect.custom` symbol, but it was exported as
`customInspectSymbol` by `internal/util.js` and referenced as
`inspectSymbol` by `buffer.js`.
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added the buffer Issues and PRs related to the buffer subsystem. label Oct 26, 2016
Copy link
Member

@addaleax addaleax left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, thanks for catching this!

@addaleax
Copy link
Member

jasnell pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 28, 2016
59714cb introduced the
`util.inspect.custom` symbol, but it was exported as
`customInspectSymbol` by `internal/util.js` and referenced as
`inspectSymbol` by `buffer.js`.

PR-URL: #9289
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
@jasnell
Copy link
Member

jasnell commented Oct 28, 2016

Landed in 66d5446

@jasnell jasnell closed this Oct 28, 2016
@charmander charmander deleted the buffer-inspect-symbol-reference branch October 28, 2016 17:22
evanlucas pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 3, 2016
59714cb introduced the
`util.inspect.custom` symbol, but it was exported as
`customInspectSymbol` by `internal/util.js` and referenced as
`inspectSymbol` by `buffer.js`.

PR-URL: #9289
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 18, 2016
59714cb introduced the
`util.inspect.custom` symbol, but it was exported as
`customInspectSymbol` by `internal/util.js` and referenced as
`inspectSymbol` by `buffer.js`.

PR-URL: #9289
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
addaleax pushed a commit to addaleax/node that referenced this pull request Nov 18, 2016
59714cb introduced the
`util.inspect.custom` symbol, but it was exported as
`customInspectSymbol` by `internal/util.js` and referenced as
`inspectSymbol` by `buffer.js`.

PR-URL: nodejs#9289
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
@addaleax addaleax mentioned this pull request Nov 18, 2016
4 tasks
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 19, 2016
59714cb introduced the
`util.inspect.custom` symbol, but it was exported as
`customInspectSymbol` by `internal/util.js` and referenced as
`inspectSymbol` by `buffer.js`.

PR-URL: #9289
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
@MylesBorins MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Nov 22, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
buffer Issues and PRs related to the buffer subsystem.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants