Node.js Node-API Team, 13 May 2019

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: Node.js N-API Team meeting - May 13 2019

Description

https://github.com/nodejs/bootstrap/issues/114

A

Then whatever else fills out the time until 11:00, we can spend doing this for sure. That's what I was thinking.

B

Okay, so welcome to the API team meeting for May 13 2009 teen will follow our standard agenda, which is just to see if anybody has any announcements and then get on to the things we've tagged for that the next milestone. So does anybody have anything they'd like to share.

C

Okay, if not I'm, going to open up the milestone.

B

Okay, so not the version in no chip, crates I added that one, because I saw that there was a discussion and no chip and I thought. Jim's experience was working with some of the things might help us there as well.

B

So they want to do conditional compilation based on no chip feature support, but it sounds like there's no way to figure out which snappy version is supported.

B

So Jim does that bring any sort.

D

Of bills or yeah, we we introduced the idea of a mappy version in node pre chip and in pre-built. Node pre-trip is built on top of no chip.

D

So it might make sense to to expose it at the no chip level right.

B

I, don't know enough about know Jeff is that? Do you think you have enough to sort of look at that and see I.

D

Will I will definitely look at this Michael? Okay,.

B

D

B

No, how do I say that, like just like this, yes.

D

Yes, and no, what was the other one pre-built rebuilt was just pretty it's just the word pre-built, with with no node. It's just called pre building, okay, so those two and without the.

E

E

E

Sch SCH, okay, Li.

D

Well, that's weird.

B

Why? That's it? Maybe, because this is no chip, you're, not a member. There I'm, not a member there. No, but as long as that's right, yeah.

D

E

B

Look good yeah.

B

Jim sounds sound good to you. Yeah.

D

It looks good all.

B

Right thanks a lot for looking at that cuz yeah I. Think if you learned on the other ones, maybe makes a applies to there as well. That would be great.

D

Well, we can make it consistent across the board. Yeah.

B

B

So, missions to note coffee, you I saw him that you had submitted the one I think. Oh.

D

Yeah I I put all my notes on a different issue. Probably I put a bunch of notes on the workshops: okay, so a red link, yeah, okay, just look there! So so now, when I did the submission to note comp II you I listed I listed Michael, Gabriel and Nicola as co-presenters I put your email in and I was under the impression they were gonna contact. You directly that you that that the submission system is going to send you a.

B

Note coffee, you I got an email that said: hey you're, being added to this session.

D

B

D

B

That and said yes, I, think I see everybody else's picture, so I assume you guys accept it as well. Okay,.

D

Okay, very good, very good, okay, so we we are set there, there's nothing. We can do there and until they make their decisions, I think that's open until the end of May and yes and they'll start making their decisions and then I noticed no js' interactive opened up last week. So do we want to make this? We can? We could submit a workshop and we can submit a birds of a feather I.

B

Think if we can submit the same workshop, that makes sense to me: okay, we'll be ready and probably a different audience right. That's you know. No comp will likely have more people from Europe and no Plus, yes, interactive more from North America, of course, some overlap, but I think it's different enough, though sense yeah.

D

Definitely it if you guys are up for that size.

B

D

B

D

That remember, we did that at interactive last year they hit those breakout sessions. We we hosted a little talk out in the foyer yeah in in Vancouver, so we could I think we ought to do one or the other I don't know if it makes sense to do both make.

B

Like we think that either one makes sense, it's probably good to submit both just depending on whether they are looking for more bird of the feathers versus workshops or okay. Okay, the thing is thirty to forty minutes. Was it that long last year, I.

D

Don't think it was that long I think it's like I did twenty to thirty.

D

That what's interesting, is they at last year's conference they had breakouts and we we called ours of birds of a feather and and now they're they're, not doing breakouts they're doing birds of a feather okay anyhow, what I'll do is I will post a an abstract for birds of a feather based on the one we did last the breakout we did last year right.

B

Now I think the the discussion we had earlier was to maybe generalize it as well for the birds of a feather to be a bit more like it could be an add on birds of a feather.

D

B

With add-ons yeah native add-ons birds of the feather with a flavor of any pie, okay, good, because that just strikes me as like: if there's people did yeah okay, who thought it made sense for the other one I'm thinking will be for this one as well. Okay,.

D

And Nicola and Gabriel are you up to be included for that further? That proposal I'm.

A

Certain a game, though I, don't know how well I actually be able to attend, but occasionally I think I'm. Okay,.

D

Absolutely and Nicola: okay, perfect, but I'll post, the abstract for the birds of a feather before I. Do any posting.

F

Just don't repeat.

F

A

B

We get if they end up saying: let's do both we can figure out how to make them interesting, like.

E

Even in the birds.

B

Of a feather I think covering some of the things that Gabriel hiding is in his blog post, yeah yeah, you don't talk talking about these are some of the things that the project has worked on, which are not any PII specific, but you know in the version of feathers like hey. Does that resonate with people? Are there other ones like that? And then we can also talk about you know any PR and adoption and all that kind of stuff.

C

A

I think I think if we do a workshop on on on add ons, then we should definitely emphasize not only an API itself, but also also the sort of the advent of worker threads and and how that influences state management in an add-on. Yeah I think that's very important. It's becoming ever more important, so basically we're both static variables are a big no-no because of that people need to get used to that and also proper cleanup at the end. Yeah.

B

So I think yeah making it a generic. You know add-ons birds of a feather. We can, you know. Nepa I certainly will still be one of the things we're pitching that particular topic and any others that we can. Think of that. We want to sort of say in terms of building your native add-ons be good.

B

I've created a newish I'm, creating a new issue here, just so that we have a like a one that says a let's: we've got a deadline: yeah.

B

Okay and I think this other one that we were looking at. We can probably then close right because it sounds like you've submitted yeah. We might link it to the other issue. Yeah.

C

That workshop right, yes.

B

I, don't know that we still need that other one open are people submitting other things as well for new coffee. You.

B

B

Got a no nickel or Gabriel: were you planning? Oh yeah, see Gabriel. You were planning a talk, sup reserve, a native I. Don't have you already submitted that one? No.

A

I haven't I, haven't yet I'm uh I'm kind of I'm kind of snowed in right now, I'm gonna try to find time for it. Okay, so maybe we.

B

Should leave this open just as a reminder if you yeah.

A

B

Okay and I guess Nikhil odd. You submitted the.

F

One please.

B

Yes, you have submitted that one or no okay, okay, so we'll leave this open as a reminder to say: okay still planning to submit those those two months. Okay,.

D

C

Right workshop.

B

This missions don't know coffee use so anything more to talk on those before I move on I.

D

Work it from here Michael sounds.

B

Good to separate her additional package, I think.

B

This one right, yes, okay, so that one's is there any reason like okay, you've, all your things were addressed right, I'm thinking it's. This is just doc right, so, let's just land it except for login. Don't he's not my problem.

E

C

B

And I think related. There was there was an issue this week, which I don't know last week, I, don't know how it's gonna turn out in the end, but there's like some functionality. It looked like there was a place. You know a bug in the async worker implementation, and you know Ana put a PR to fix that. But then it ended up breaking eat.

B

You know fixed well, broke, eight and I think still lust doesn't look like it might have been still related to that sort of the finalization.

B

More we've had a few PRS to try and fix memory, leaks and stuff around that, but the the mate the reason I mentioned it here is I. Think that actually pushes us towards the approach we've taken, which is sort of minimal wrapper, because the more you have in the wrapper the higher the likelihood that there's a bug there and I think bugs. There might then force you to have to recompile versus, if there's a bug in an API itself, and we fix it in the VM.

B

You don't necessarily have to recompile to get that fixed, whereas in the wrapper you were. You of course, do have to recompile to be able to get that so making making there be less in the wrapper makes I think sense. From that perspective, as well.

B

Right so this one I think we can now close right anybody, everybody agree. I did close it. Okay,.

B

Possible advantages to take.

B

Advantage of loogie stability- this is actually quite a ways back. He knew.

F

Last week we we, we took good with the Singapore's maintainer and he asked for you. We pulled the supports on an API.

B

Okay, so it's not very complex, so that's right is that is that all they would need to make serial port an API dependent.

F

A

That's that's the biggest, that's that's the biggest stopper for them, but it's not really a stopper they're, just concerned that that you know it's gonna break even though an API doesn't break it will break, and so so so that's why that's why I I was asking about whether you know there's any chance that you'd be pulled, he's gonna break.

A

You know as a result of a possible db2 point over these because I mean okay.

E

A

Are ABI breaks that doesn't mean every single API will be incompatible just you know the ones that break, and so that's why I asked Colin. But but you know he passed the buck to to to Ben and I, haven't seen any reaction from Ben. Yet right.

B

Now I assume as well like you'd, be Paul T, there's a whole bunch of API as that uses that right, yeah.

A

I mean yeah, I I was I, guess I was asking about that whole group of api's.

B

Because it would be that that would be. My question is like how much that was to be added to any PRI like how many new functions would that end up being right?.

A

And it would be pretty one-to-one with, with the V.

B

Right, you know if it was one or two and it solves a big problem, so that many more native modules could then rely on API. They could see making sense that it's like the whole whack of them, then you're like well wait a sec. Where do you stop with it? With would B be rapping right.

A

Exactly yeah yeah and besides you know, if we, if we, if we, if we start rapping one-to-one, especially a big enough chunk of libuv, then we are, you know, committing ourselves to the same shortcomings that libuv itself has which your reason for breaking it. Right, though, you know we rap, we need to rap carefully yeah I.

B

Agree, it comes back to your earlier idea, I. Think of the if we can have separate numbers so that you could say well I'm using an API. But you know this binary works as long as you're using any PII and this version of Ruby B, for example, right yeah,.

A

Yeah, but the thing is like I mean you know that that becomes ever more granular right like at some point. You end up with that with a situation where you are essentially duplicating every single API and assigning a number to every single API, and at that point you know you, you you're you're, just you're, just trying to deal with the complexity by reintroducing the complexity. You know at that point you might as well just let the a don't crash, and let that tell you that that there's a that there's an ABI incompatibility. You know well.

B

Except the crash like crashing is not good. Is that usually pink? No.

A

No obviously yeah, but what I'm saying is that you're you're you're you're you're trying to prevent the crash at a cost that is so high in terms of complexity. That.

F

A

It's just not worth implementing that. You know because you get so many numbers I mean you know. Do we do we do we sort of section off UV, Polti and a sign? It's a number. You know because I mean because then, if we don't, then even though UV pull te it broken, you know the atom will need to be recompiled because it'll refuse to load because the version of libuv, which happens to be perfectly compatible with the atom because the add-on only uses you can be faulty. It's now different yeah.

B

Well, yeah you're right: we can't we can't go all the way, but I think I think like libuv, actually wouldn't be that you know. When was the last breaking change, that there was.

E

B

There's a semper major every couple years, then actually being able to say well, you can use it in as long as you know, as long as you, it hasn't changed that actually still has value right exactly.

A

And even even even if it does, even if a new somber major is released, it does not break the entire API. You know so so so you know it's basically a case-by-case situation right. Thank you. Some modules will continue to be ABI compatible right, whereas others will not, and so so so so then the only your only choice is to be reactive about it.

A

You know and just handle the bug reports and say: oh okay, fine I'll do another release, but but with an API, the number of such bug reports will still greatly decrease right because, because you know I mean all the engine stuff isn't gonna break anymore. At least you know.

C

A

And you've ER the being as stable as it has been. Even if a new major is released, not everything will break. You know, because you know they they they'll fix with it they'll break what they have to break there. They are not being.

B

A

They're breaking so.

B

You're arguing the protection is worse than the cure.

D

B

Yeah yeah, like saying just don't run it all, is actually worse than just running and crashing because that's gonna be infrequent to know.

A

Yeah yeah I mean yeah that we are sort of. We are sort of approaching that inflection point as well right where, where you don't really need the versions anymore, you know and you don't need to intentionally, throw upon trying to load the module, because chances are that it'll be far more stable than than it was in the past. So yes, that's true.

A

However, even if you crash, you know yes, crashing is bad and and and and a graceful exit is preferable, but the crashes will be far fewer and further in between now right we got all your yeah.

B

I think you're making the case for like today. We basically say you can use an API, but only if you're, only using an API things.

A

Exactly exactly and and you know we could- we could say: okay go ahead and use other libraries right, because the rate at which at which API incompatibilities will be reported is greatly reduced by the introduction of an API. It's not eliminated, but.

G

A

Reduced right because I'm a major component is now a bi-stable, whereas it wasn't before yeah. True, you know yeah, it's it's a it's a tough call to make, but you know going in the direction of introducing even more version. Numbers may not be the right solution. Okay,.

B

A

That's an interesting perspective on.

B

That it's like does it yeah yeah.

A

Because we introduced, we introduced the the module version numbers precisely to sort of keep. These like right, keep health an ecosystem up; okay, but now they are no longer relevant because well, we have version numbers now, but they change much much much more slowly and and the major version you know. Unless there's a break in the language, it is unlikely to change. You know so.

B

Yeah so right, yeah, that's interesting. Okay, so we could I think we still need to figure out the strategy on that front. Yeah yeah because, like I, would have been thinking that well, you know we still say to be safe. You shouldn't, but it there is. An argument, like you said to say well is, is: is that being safe costing you more than the value of avoiding the crash or something yeah.

A

Yeah cuz, as we as soon as we impose a decision as to as to whether to refuse to load the module. We are bound to run into corner cases where we make the wrong decision. You know and then.

B

A

If you have more.

B

Awesome than not yeah.

A

Yeah- and you know, and I mean we can the only way we can make the correct decision every time is to associate a version number with every single symbol. You know yeah.

G

We're not gonna.

A

Do that that's crazy yeah, but you know, on the other hand, on the other hand, this this is a language limitation, if you think about it, because it because you know see could be what is that called reflexive enough to get.

G

A

You know, and- and you know we could have a formalism for for for ABI versioning, but I mean that's beyond the scope. I mean that's just beyond the scope. You know right yeah. That would that's something that would belong in a library load there, honestly yeah yeah, ok, so that's interesting and I think I think we are. We are already kind of. We are we already kind of have a little bit of a graceful degradation in the sense that you know it will fail with an exception.

A

If there's a missing symbol like the the the app will keep running it's not going to like crash hard, you know if there's a missing symbol in the in the shared object it doesn't require, will simply fail. So it's not gonna have a nice message. It's just gonna. Have you know missing symbol.

B

But there are other kinds of changes that would be similar. Major clients wouldn't feel that way. I think.

A

Yeah yeah yeah yeah, no, no they're, the the worst, the worst yeah and the original reason for having this this versioning system is is the is the subtle, the subtle crash, where you just get a sec bolt and you don't know why all of a sudden, yeah and and yeah so basically for those for those you know, given that we've adopted this. Is this a bi-stability commitment and given that we are placing much more value on ABI stability in general, even outside of an API?

A

You know, that's that's where the trade-off starts to come in, like you know, do we can we just pedal back and say: hey those crashes are acceptable because there's gonna be a lot fewer of them. You know or.

G

A

Pissed, the module system is starting to or the module virgin versioning system is starting to become become too rigid. It's driving churn to some extent now right.

B

A

B

You have to rebuild your.

A

Binary, even when.

B

A

No good reason yeah or very often, for no good reason, and so so the very good reason you know is it worth paying the price into at the time when you rebuild the binary for no good reason, you know, is that a small enough price to pay in exchange for not having these subtle crashes rails now.

B

I guess, though, like this there's what we have in no chip in pre-build like can you do the right thing like so, for example, oK you've decided you're using an API, so there's no new version of any API, but you know that in this version of node you're gonna crash.

A

For what reason would you grow.

B

Because you know you're using the Divi and the devious change, though oh yeah.

A

Yeah yeah yeah, okay yeah, then you wouldn't have any information about that, except except to know that you crash okay, so then, okay, so then you need to okay. I see you need to inform app, rebuild and note free to create two different versions, and this arbitrary point in there in the version: history, yeah, okay and there's no way to inform them of that.

B

Yeah or it's it's not yeah, it's like, can you tell the tools to do the right thing? Is the question.

A

Well, presumably, presumably, if there's going to be a new major release of libuv, it's going to coincide with a new major release of nodes. So at that point the tool the tool would be able to handle that right because like well, no, it wouldn't right. It wouldn't be able to handle that, because you're only keying on an API right.

D

Yeah the enemy, API version, yeah.

A

Yeah, and that is.

B

Both of them both or like you know, basically, you want to say that if it's version and node version X or later and an API.

A

Version do something right.

B

A

It doesn't right it doesn't. You know so far: the the node module version. Sorry, okay, sorry guys, I gotta! Take this.

A

B

Jim, like I, think we added new variables right, but weren't those variables usable in terms of names and stuff, yeah, I guess. The thing is, though, that as soon as you use them in the name, you get a new binary for every yeah.

D

The the code I added would permit you to. Let's see, let me let me think here it would it it would it would fire off multiple builds one for each n API version and then it would communicate the N API version into the code using a macro defined right, so the it might, and there there has been some question about the ability to support an API and man build simultaneously, so that it's something that I need to research, but I felt confident that there was a way to do that.

D

So if we could support that, then we might be able to support multiple builds based on the the node version right. So then the node version and the N API version B could be communicated into the C code and then the C code could do conditional builds based on that. So it seemed to me at one point: when I looked at it, that you could simultaneously do a series of an API build and an an build okay. So since I'm looking at this for no chip yeah, it's something else, I can look at okay.

D

This is kind of a context. Switch for me to get my head back into that.

A

D

I'm glad we're having this discussion, because I can look at that. At the same time with that yeah.

B

That makes sense, cuz yeah I mean I. Think it's almost like you want to say between these node versions, then I'm going to use the API version, all right, basically say: okay, when I hit this note version I'm using WV I'm using Lib, Evie and I know that I know outside of the protection of the number that hey there's a new thing in the BB which breaks me yeah. It's at this point, that's not a hard. You know if there is a new little UV that doesn't break you, you don't worry about it.

B

There is, you can then put it in in terms.

B

That make some sense: okay, so yeah. So that was some just sounds like it almost sounded like I think I saw some other discussion that Francis might start working on an API port.

B

The libuv stuff was that what was discussed last week- or he.

D

Was very motivated to get an N API version going so I I would suspected that he's plowing ahead independent of this okay.

B

D

B

I tried to spend some time, starting that, but never really.

C

B

I'm, just looking back through the the one thing we don't have here, which I think we should, but maybe we close the issue because it had other things that was the maybe.

B

Anymore, oh yeah, the SQLite port yeah.

D

Okay, so we're at a point where the vast majority of the unit tests are passing, there's a handful, a handful that are failing, so my approach has always been to get into lol, DB and- and you know, step through the code and figure out.

D

What's going on I'm having difficulties making that work and so I'm thinking Michael, it might be good if we were able to schedule a time where we could brainstorm I I, don't know that when you were working with Anisha and Samson yeah I, don't know how hands-on you were with them, but what I? What I need help is getting my development system set up, so I can debug why these handful of unit tests, sure yeah I know we should be able to get the break the debugger to.

B

Break okay, I yeah: we should be able to do that, like the module needs to be compiled in debug mode yeah, and then there are I have had some tricky stuff, but I. Think if you basically like start the debugger and then say run the program like set the breakpoint and then run. We should be able to get that working right.

D

Okay, so where I'm at right now is in a couple days, I leave for two back-to-back trips. Okay, so I'll be back in about two weeks, and maybe we could schedule time then Michael that works for me, because next.

B

Week, I'm off in a conference and the week after I'm actually gone too so, okay, okay, perfect.

D

I mean that's three.

B

Weeks then, no, but no you're.

A

B

Week then we're gone two weeks.

A

We have, we have Kevin and Nitesh, maybe you can promote them. ah Okay, sorry.

B

Let me find that.

F

B

Yeah, sorry about that, both of you and since we just promoted you was there anything we were trying to say or interject. In the meantime, we.

A

Yeah Kevin was saying that it would be changing the single and API version to like some sort of December versioning system based off of the underlying libuse, embers and and I yeah I. Think I. Think the general picture here is that December changes, as often as the most often changing temper right.

G

And is that I I was kind of thinking when you guys were kind of talking about how you would already have two kind of different versions, one for the N API version and one for the Lib UV version to me. It was kind of sounding like would it be possible just to have two like a assembler versioning of an API instead of having just this one, scalar single version that we currently have?

G

A

Already have we already, we already have versioning for an API right like we have an API version, 1, 2, 3 and 4 out right now and and those are actually the fully qualified member mirja version of those will be. Like one point, one point: one point: zero. One point two point: zero. One point three point: zero one point four point: zero yeah.

B

They're not they're non breaking exactly.

A

B

Whole reason we were talking about having two numbers is because you know we hope that likes for 80% of modules, who don't use libuv.

B

You know you you. It is in cember so like if you're just using an API, there's no semper major. You just continue to use it. It's additive. What we're you know well, we're trying to trying to figure out is the well okay. Lavie B doesn't change that often. So, if you do use libuv, maybe a second number would make sense so that you could say he's kind of like each each add-on could opt into the additional things they use.

B

So if you just use that API, then you're just you know, you're not going to be broken. If you choose to use napi and Libby B, then you could indicate that and say well on dependent on the BV version. X.

G

So how Gabe was explaining how the current version means? We have one point. One point: zero or one point, two point: zero. We wouldn't want to put this libuv in the the minor version. No.

A

G

It will be putting it as two.

A

Sorry WV is basically orthogonal to an API right. So so so we cannot write.

E

G

A

B

Then it but then Gabriel point is like okay, but then you add one for OpenSSL. You add one for HTTP and you end up at a large number of numbers.

A

And even even with that large number of numbers, you still force people to rebuild their thing, even though it even though, in their particular use case, it hasn't really broke. Okay, so there's still there's still that unnecessary turn right and and the more stable things become in general, the fewer libraries break and the less often they break the more. The churn is something you want to avoid because, because the price you pay in terms of these in terms of these subtle SEC fault, is ever smaller, with increasing API stability, mm-hmm.

G

Okay I see and then another thought that I had that I just wanted to bring up. I guess was that you guys were talking about wrapping that UV Polti and it's possible that maybe there may be a breaking change in UV that we wrapped and now our wrapper was broken. Yeah.

A

Yeah but now we have an opportunity to pave over that right.

G

A

We can implement the wrapper differently internally without changing its surface, so correct.

G

A

Know having having that having the wrapper, give an opportunity to to keep things constant while things underneath change in theory, but but on the other hand, you know bottlenecks which which which stem from the design of the underlying API we will face if we simply propagate the underlying API and we just add one layer of indirection above it which which it just calls through you know. So we don't want to inherit the bottlenecks and we don't know the bottlenecks ahead of time right.

A

So, okay, we could add, we could add sort of a relief valve, but but ultimately, ultimately that comes with its own price. You know, so you have to make a very, very careful decision. You know, and so correct me correct me if I'm wrong so far, what we've been doing is that we've sort of wrapped we've wrapped commonly used concepts rather than yeah yeah.

B

Yeah, like it's a trade-off between you know, if you went to the extremists that will wrap all of Libby B, then you're like well wait a second. Why can't shouldn't? We certainly be trying to make Libby B itself stable, yeah.

D

B

At the other end, if you, if you wrap one function and that's so widely used that it's, it means that you know all, but one percent of the modules can now use it without without having to worry. It makes sense. So it's like in the case of this one I was gonna.

B

Ask me earlier like well: is it one API or is it like thirty api's, because for me that makes one of the is part of the biggest decision as to whether it would make sense to pull it in or not and I said, I suspect that one with pole, because you know you can pull sockets, you can pull file handles. It's probably going to be quite a big number of functions.

G

Unfortunately, gotcha okay yeah, and that was that Camilla, okay.

B

Okay, so I think, just while you were on the call Gabriel I, don't know if you caught it, but Jim is gonna, think a little bit about what we've done in pre dip and pre pre build since he was already volunteered to look at that in terms of no Jim just to see. If we think that what's already there would let you do the right thing. If, for example, you decided to depend on the Vivi and there was a breaking change like, could you could you use the existing information to generate?

B

You know the set of binaries? You would need yeah.

A

Yeah yeah yeah yeah. That's that's that! That's that's definitely worth looking at because I. That libuv also has like a like that, like a version declared in its headers and stuff. So so then so then, if that can, if that can be harvested and interpreted as part of the build process, the pre build or note project process, and then then that could also be used to key to key the the name of the module. Well, you.

B

A

Figure that in from the node version, yeah.

B

Yeah yeah yeah. Oh good point! Yes, that's.

A

B

It then is it, can you, can you actually come up with a mechanism using the information? That's there so that you get binaries only you know you. It's sort of like this range of any of node versions. I want to use the an epi version within yeah, but at the next one I want to use a different I want to create it for one and I'm, not sure the tools can do that, but sort of that's what Jim's gonna figure out for us. Okay,.

A

Yeah I mean like if the, if the, if the you know realistically, if we, if we do key by by napi version, which we already do, and we also key by libuv version, then realistically, the libya v version is not going to change very soon and very awesome. So, even if we do that, we are we are. We are as stable as we are now right and we will be able to respond to to to an incoming breaking libuv in the future, using tools that everybody is already familiar with.

A

So there's definitely value in that, even if, even if, even if we have this extra term, where the module that is currently going through node, free chipper or node pre-build is one that wouldn't really be broken. If we didn't have the concept of tracking libuv, even if it's one of those modules, you know actually one of those you know like. If, even if it's one of those modules it will, you know it's still a smaller price to pay. You know because the newbie doesn't change that often right well and based.

B

On your argument, you'd really want to be able to just say: I want a breakpoint at this node first, because then you could decide whether it had broken you or not. True, true yeah, yeah, exactly right. So, basically I, you know between this version. This version I won't use any PR to decide what you need to build, but there's a break point and then for the next range and that's you can look at it and say: yeah: okay, I'm using live EB I'm using open SSL, but even with the new versions.

A

It's fine, that's an excellent idea. Actually, that's an excellent idea: let's, uh let's let the module declare the breakpoints rather than rather than try to try to infer the breakpoints right. That's that's a great idea. Yeah.

B

Sure is whether you can you can do that right. So, oh, but.

A

Wait a second, you know the breakpoint. No, you can't! No, no because I mean right now, it's it's! Basically it decides from from the headers what to build right, then, and declarations you made in your package JSON. So you are sort of kind of already declaring, but you know, node version.

A

Isn't the only thing that advances, because you know you, you have like the electron scenario and you have like the Debian scenario, where it's with a bi incompatible, even though it's the same node version right so so, but but still being able to provide a description of the breakpoints in terms of all node versions. Like would be really useful, like basically make me a binary four node module version, X and API version, Y, libuv versions, then you know and then and then that's one descriptor, and then you have another.

A

You have another descriptor for for for this, you know and for another combination of version and and then basically basically you you tailor your binaries to your audience right now and you know which binary covers which which which interval and we to dimension well, so so yeah yeah, being able to fully specify this using using note, rebuild and and Note 3 tip would be absolutely useful. I think I mean you could even I mean thinking. Thinking ahead, you you could even like break at a minor version.

A

If you know that your module is is being hit by some some really subtle incompatibility, that's not even considered temper major by the community, but which happens to break your module trial, so so yeah yeah. That would be super awesome.

A

If we had complete descriptors that that that these tools understood and then and then basically that would there would also motivate developers to use these tools because otherwise you know they would they wouldn't be able to do to handle this as well, because you know, if you don't use pretty build, then then, whatever binary, you know your users build from sources. The binary they're stuck with and if they, if they move across one of these breakpoints, it's gonna break for them. Yeah yeah.

B

I think it's learning learning demo and what we couldn't couldn't do a bit more yeah.

A

Yeah, that's that's an awesome idea.

B

Okay think so focus on async worker.

E

B

Mean we had several discussions on that worked through a number of the issues that we just have to get time to push some of those forward know if there's any more okay, I, don't see anything too much on that you probably need to maybe next I, where we only have four minutes left, but maybe next time we have more time. We can take a look at that one again and see what what our next steps are.

C

B

We talked about this to a lightboard burn down list of issues. Any particular ones, I mentioned that one other one, any others that people want to call it this. This time.

A

uh We closed the issue with, with uh with calling navigation cue like an epic. You async work more than once, with with the documentation fix. Okay,.

B

A

I I've assigned the the attached exception breakage under with with a debug bill to myself. I'll try to get it to take a look at that in in the coming week. Okay sounds good.

G

If we have a little bit of time, I've been working with Jane Howe with thread safe functions, Gabe. If you have some time to look over, that, we kind of came we're stuck at a point where how you mentioned, like the the object itself, cannot be responsible for knowing whether or not it has to be aborted.

G

So we we're stuck at this point where the thread safe function. If you have a reference for it, and then you overwrite the reference, then you've kind of lost, this open thread safe function, and you don't know whether it's like nodes still has the reference for it. So the thread safe function is still open and but you've over wrote the reference. So we were wondering like I, don't know, I was looking at the other things.

G

I'd use this sort of suppress, destruct and whatnot, where the programmer explicitly states whether or not to destruct it on destruction. But the problem is we don't know if it would be the same as abort. You know, because for a thread safe function, you can either release it or abort it and I, don't know if it makes sense. If you would have this suppressed destruct functionality, mimic mimicking this abort or not like that. That's currently we're where we stand. So, if you have some time to to look at that where any.

A

Guy, obviously, might my overall impression here regarding dysfunction is that we cannot really add too much value as a rapper. Precisely because we you know, we cannot have any instances which which have a life of their own.

A

You know like that, if you, the only thing we can do really I think is, maybe maybe provide some some some convenience like implicit tests and and the kind of bling you know, but but we cannot I, don't I, don't even think we can store like like per instance variables, because if we do, then you have to worry about the instance lifecycle, right and and the threats a function.

A

Lifecycle is entirely managed by the the napi implementation, and maybe it's a shortcoming of the implementation that that that the instance that it it doesn't give you a callback for for when the instance is about to be like destroyed. You know it just kind of assumed that that that that the node takes care of that or or the napi implementation takes care of that, so so that that actually may be something that we should do for for.

G

Finalize callback is.

G

A

G

A finalized callback and I was thinking like. Could we wrap something over the finalized callback, but I? Don't know if that's an option like I really don't know that much about what we can do so I.

A

Believe so I I have to yeah yeah. Okay, wait the finalized callback into standard NEPA, finalized callback, meaning.

G

A

An environment that the first parameter, which means it's running on them on the on the main thread right, yes,.

G

It's called when all of the threads say from all of the functions have released it, or one has aborted it, and everyone.

A

G

A

Yeah, so so, basically, basically it says that it says that I'm about to deallocate this object, though,.

G

A

Yeah yeah that's a better safe hook. Then it's not a thread safe hook, because all the threads have already released it. So you can that will like talking into that, will ensure that some code runs on the main thread when it's time to destroy things.

A

So so you know, if you yeah, if you don't, if you don't do the thing where you like track, has it been awarded and so forth, because and you track that in a non-threatening fashion, if you don't do that, then yeah, you should be, you should be able to store State on there. You know in a non threaten in your own object, so so the rapper can have state of its own as long as the state has read-only to all the other threads. You know right. Okay,.

G

A

You can you can you cannot make decisions on that state from any thread except the main thread, and you can only make decisions on the state in the finalizer? That's that's. Basically the restriction, but.

G

A

That gives you it that gives you a life cycle, callback, a useful life cycle callbacks and that's fine. Okay,.

G

Perfect all right, I'll talk to him about that to see what he says right, thanks, yeah.

B

Okay, great, that's it then we'll call it for today um and maybe I'll catch up with you, some other time or or I guess Gabriel. Maybe you want to try like just starting up a meeting and see if you can start the video going, because I won't be here next Monday, okay, so if you just want to validate, then if you have any problems, let me know so. We can make sure that you're up and running for next Monday, okay.

A

Yeah I'll try to I'll try to start up this meeting, probably in about two hours like two hours from now perfect all right cool. Thank you. Okay, I will.

D

Be absent the next two weeks.

B

Okay, yeah I'll be gone next week, but I'll be back for the Monday. After that, okay.

D

Great okay, the matter after that is Memorial Day in the United States.

D

Yeah, maybe all right: okay, thanks guys all.

B

Right: okay, thanks! Everybody later.