Node.js Node-API Team, 17 Jun 2019

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: Node.js N-API Team meeting - June 17 2019

Description

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

A

So welcome to the napi team meeting for June 17 2009 teen we're going to start out with a little bit of a different approach for today's meeting, as opposed to going through. Like our current milestone, we have a li and uh-huh from Google who are gonna. Tell us a little bit about some work that they've done to investigate how an API and wasum sauce was.

A

He might work together and then once they get through, that we'll have a discussion and if we have time loop back to our regular meeting so I'll, let you guys take it out. Take it off.

B

Sure hi everyone, my name, is Adi and I'm working with ohad he's an intern on our team, and he has been looking at making webassembly works better for Needham worth of authors up to date, like what we've discovered. Is that not not too many modules native modules are written with webassembly in mind because and there's lots of barriers there so so has been spending some time investigating those and understanding those and and to be clear.

B

The the benefit we see is that native add-ons, even with any PR NEPA, solve the problem that you need to write the mounts, but you still need to compile it for all different binary targets and node API and different distributions of node or node h, things like electron, and there is still quite a bit of a burden on ad module. Authors and the banner we see in web assembly is that it's really a portable binary format, so I think it would be great if native module.

B

Authors could actually just write one slate with what somehow and then distribute once using web assembly. So so what some of the things we discovered were? First of all, so webassembly, the the compiler support is coming along really well, but the biggest barrier for module authors is getting the bindings written right, so the so the code. So let's take libsass as an example, so combining lips has to webassembly it's not too difficult. You just need to do some make fellowship edits and you're done. You have an assembly, but how do you actually talk to JavaScript?

B

Now there that's the difficult part, so there's projects like Emscripten and I'm bind but they're designed with the browser in mind, and they require you to actually modify your source code in order to work. Well, there's other technologies like web IDL that are one not quite mature yet and second, there seem to be designed with more of a sort of browser. Ish use case in mind, so we do not think web is a web. Idl would serve for the nose work for the node native module ecosystem and and that's I, think, a discussion.

B

We should probably start having with webassembly working groups to make sure that the the JavaScript platform doesn't end up with the ideal story. That is very, very focused on the browser use case and doesn't address the node media module use case, but anyway, that that's more of a digression. So so right now, what we discovered was there's no real do that exists. That makes it easy for later module authors to just target web assembly and node, so so so so so hard actually came up with an idea and it turns out independently.

B

Some other folks also came up with the same idea, so it yeah and I came gonna share my desktop.

B

There's a screen and won't emit I wanna share actually have never done share desktop on this thing before so, are you able to see my screen here, yep all right, so so here's a diagram and I like to actually let ohad talk talk to this one. Okay,.

C

So they see, the idea here is how we can expose an API or naffy to a web assembly program and there's kind of two approaches that you can take to that which are either rewriting all of an API inside of or like separately from the implementation that actually exists, and you could like emulate it using JavaScript or just like remaking some of the functionality.

C

But the approach that I think is the most straightforward for having all the features and keeping up with like what the actual an API does is to essentially like give access directly to an API from webassembly. So the way I'm doing that I guess I'll point to it with the mouse. So basically, we have node, which exposes the N API and it's pretty simple to just hook into that from an 8-bit module. But hooking into that from webassembly is obviously gonna not be straightforward, because there's no way to do bindings easily. So essentially without.

A

Question when you say bindings, are you talking about the part where you're calling from JavaScript to you know out into the native module, or is it like trying to reach back from JavaScript when you're inside of the module or or just expand a little bit on what you mean by that sure?.

C

So in like the simplest case, it's gonna be bridging between JavaScript and web assembly code, because there's no like type conversions and things like that.

C

But all sort of bridging between web assembly and native C code isn't really straightforward because they work in like basically web assemblies and is sandboxed and it doesn't have access to the entire memory space of the program, which complicates things like array buffers, for example, because you can't just like access the memory that that node is allocating and it's true for a lot of things, because not all the types line up like, for example, pointers are 32-bit instead of 64 bit inside of webassembly, and so there's like lots of little issues that you kind of have to resolve when going back and forth, which means that we can't just directly expose the functions and then the other thing is just the web assembly.

C

Api doesn't let us hook in like a normal c function. We have to write a wrapper around it. That basically specifies like what the arguments and results are of that function, just because the con conventions aren't super straightforward.

C

So essentially, what I'm doing here is, if you notice this little blue thing, is the wrapper layer around an API which should be pretty thin other than like a couple of pain points, for example like a red buffers like I was talking about, but for the most part, all it's doing is just re, exposing be the normal any API functions, and what that means is that we can now call that through web assembly.

C

As long as we expose those functions to web assembly, so using the C API, we can pretty much just port those functions over.

B

So C API is a new proposal in webassembly that exposes C functions to other assembly yeah.

C

All it's doing is basically saying like this is a native function and you're allowed to call it so.

B

In a nutshell, I think what this enables is that if some, if a module has been written against any API, then what we will do is expose some any bi imports that could be built into node. So in NN API you could say it's important. So in your web assembly code you could say import any bi, something from any bi and that basically allows gives you access to all of the any API functions and nav is an abstraction about over on top of the VM right.

B

So so that, basically, is your way of talking to JavaScript. So the idea is, if you, if you have a Moneta module that can all it is already written against an ABI, then you don't actually need to modify anything. You can simply compile it to Val, 'some and node will provide some of these boxes at runtime, so you can import directly from them and that's it like your module works as a web assembly module. If no provides these API and.

A

I guess I assume that that also is provided that you're, just using huazi defined functions or like that, if I go and use some windows function, call in my C code. That's that that can't work right.

C

Right so it's basically, this is kind of focused on like how we can do things with cross-platform libraries, because webassembly isn't really gonna ever solve like calling like a windows api function, just because how like separated it is from like the native platform and so essentially like modules that would fit into this well or like things like libsass, which are like pure compute based right. Okay,.

A

C

So things that are I, oh man, aren't necessarily going to be a great use case, although in some cases huazi will expose that functionality yeah.

B

So, for example, if you wanted SQLite working then three other, then that all could be webassembly and that could work, including the I/o part, which was he would write. But if you have in compute strictly speaking, you don't even need wuzzy right, because what you need was he for the iOS and the system calls. And if you might use that, then yep then.

A

You just need wasum yeah, no, but it's I'm, but it sounds like at least then you'd have a consistent like for node. It would be consistent, and it's that, like you know, depending on what you're using in your module, you would still use an API to interact with JavaScript and create module.

A

However, if you, if you're using small, you know if you're not using anything special, you can potentially even just compile it down to something that will run everywhere through us right, which, which sounds like a great story to meet and and consistent right as opposed to well, if you want to do something here, go do something completely different than what you were doing before all right. Yeah.

C

So the goal of this is really to make it like straightforward for someone to start porting libraries to web assembly without really having to put like a lot of planning into how to execute it. And it's bending like right months, worrying about everything. Ideally, it should be pretty much like one to one compatible with just the normal and API you.

A

Mentioned like in scripting stuff, like do you not need to use that anymore, like how does the compilation step work to.

C

Basically, unscripted is built on top of LLVM and a lot of the features from unscripted have been back ported into LLVM so that you can just use, claimed and compiled to webassembly the difference being. That Emscripten is very much built for like compiling things to JavaScript browser code in general, and it has a long kind of like history of doing that. I guess, which has created some like leaky, abstractions, I, guess into how a lot of the interaction with the browser works.

C

So what that means is that the api's are generally designed for JavaScript and don't really work great inside of web assembly, and so one way of getting around that is really just to cut out the middleman there and do everything directly through, like the web assembly API and just compiled to like straightforward web assembly code. To do that. You can just use claim as normal and just a couple like build step changes. Yeah.

B

So I think of Emscripten as two things. One is a compiler that can target whatever assembly plus all of this data conversions right, so many when it so when a c function returns a car, pointer, yeah.

D

B

What do you do to it to get it to JavaScript lines? Krypton has lots of non-standard sort of conversions that it does that are sort of very browser specific in my opinion, and also sort of non-standard things, and it just has its behaviors that may you may not necessarily want in a native add-on right, so so yeah I'm Krypton seems like like a dead end. From that point of view to me, okay,.

A

And Mike my brief look. It was amiss it's fairly limited in terms of types and stuff right as well, so.

C

There's actually a proposal that getting somewhere I guess that adds like reference types. We don't we get a lot more of that, but for now it's really just integers and floating point, which means that there's a lot more like conversion work. Yeah did you write.

A

Okay, so, and it has to be clang versus GCC or.

C

So I don't think GCC has a webassembly back-end right now, but in theory you could pretty much use em script in instead of claim. For example, if you just disabled some of the like extra code generation and in theory like any c compiler that compiles to Wasson should work as long as it's fairly like standard.

C

B

I personally have been using the huazhi SDK, but which is like packaging of LLVM yeah with the wall GC suit, which means that if it actually makes the life really simple and getting anything compiled because your function does any it uses any functionality from Lib. C then was he provides. It means that you don't actually have to figure out how to get your print working. It just works with the least amount of resistance, possible and I said.

A

C implementation.

B

Well, it's implemented on top of vazhi right so which is not hopeful bollocks, so so I don't know if it's full, but the thing is like the most obvious thing you would need in a simple C program is how does malloc work and who provides right.

D

B

Compare work right so in the anything up till the Cisco is provided by the system like the header files and what he provides yeah and then the rest is provided at runtime, there's a experimental PR from def snik that adds wali supporter node, so we've been playing with that and that actually works really well. Okay,.

A

So that's nice, so basically they could even be you know. It sounds like it could be such that modulo compilers on different platform. Your module could just compile like you know it could compile in the same way that other modules are compiled today.

C

Yeah right so in theory, the only thing to really change. There is just adding like some basic support to the build system for like huazi, sdk and all right, just adding in like the unchanging where it looks for headers. But for the most part it would pretty much be the exact same.

A

Yeah that definitely very interesting. So how far like do you have a repo where some of this works, or so.

C

Where I am right now is I, have most of the like wrapper functions already written and that just all pretty much auto-generated code and those are just finding directly into you. You, like the actual API, um there's a couple of things that I still have to add to that like for more specific cases where I can't just auto, generate the code and then I have the headers written.

C

All of this right now is in like an internal repos, but I think it'll, probably open source relatively soon, with, like some test code, to kind of show it in action and.

A

Will it be like a module or there's.

B

A

Module like no dad on API that you would depend your make your app. Your thing depend on or how's that gonna work, though.

C

In the near term, like some of the features that we require, aren't landed in node yet so this is probably going to be built on top of the like node CI build, which has like, though, one of the like newer versions of v8 since, like basically, we have to back port the Waze and C API for this to really work. But that's already in the node C I build. So right now is probably going to be built on top of that and then we'll take those changes out and migrate them to node as needed. Yeah.

B

So short answer is: I keep it's a PR against node, because the idea is that this built in Nappi module not and B module yeah.

B

It makes sense for node to provide so it doesn't ultimately becomes a node pull request, so it will probably be called nappy unstable in in the spirit of our episode is doing things like modules are a call away. So then the namespace they put a unstick unstable suffix on the namespace so that until it's really stable.

A

So those so like it would be a PR witch. It's additional.

A

Like the wrappers and stuff, what are the wrapper so.

C

Yes, the wrappers are just gonna, be like it's: it's not a lot of code. That really has to be added, just like one small wrapper for every function in nappy and then all that it's doing is basically like overriding how node passes in or I guess. In this case it would have to override how v8 passes in imports to webassembly.

C

Just because we have to add some default ones and that'll just be like a simple change to be it, and then node will automatically pass these in as long as the like feature flag is enabled, but like in terms of how the code will be it'll, be like a separate file from the actual nappy stuff, it'll share the same headers, most likely and yeah. So basically just a couple like extra functions and then something that passes that into web assembly code.

A

Sounds definitely sounds interesting.

C

Yeah and then I guess, if you look at the diagram, you can kind of see like where these different parts are. So the rapper is just going to be like doing what nappies doing and it's kind of parallel to huazi support, because they're accomplishing the same kind of goal of exposing like a native API to webassembly modules. Right.

A

Okay, yep yeah.

C

And so both of those will be bridged to webassembly modules through the C API, which just allows you to pass those functions in and other than that, there's not really any changes that have to be made to node. So, basically, all it's doing is just making that automatic pass. Those you.

A

So I guess: when do you think there'll be code like that we could take a look at.

C

So I don't think that it will take very long to be at a point where, like the code works, but there are a lot of changes. I have to do to the build system. I guess like JIP, won't really work here out of the box, and so I'm still gonna have to look into that. But I don't think that, like the actual rapper code and headers, and all that should be done by the end of this week at the latest, I think unless there's like some big thing, we'll.

B

Try our best to get it like public as soon as possible. The yeah! It's it's hard to get all you get it from the confirmed date, but yeah just.

A

Yeah like if it's a week or two weeks, that's it doesn't matter. It's like. It's just wanted to know if it was like that kind of timeframe or longer right.

C

Yeah so I think this is pretty near-term having it like work out of the box is probably gonna, take like the remainder of the summer and just because there's a lot of kind of like changes that I'm gonna have to make so that, like when everyone ever you build a native module. It knows like to build with the huazi SDK and to like enable the yz6 route and stuff like that, but yeah. What.

A

What um like, once you know something like we do we're doing for HTTP 3 is we have a separate repo with a fork?

A

Does that make sense here, or is the code small enough that you think, like just a direct PR that that can land exam.

B

I think what we'll do is once once we have an idea of the size of the PR. We can work on our fork right and then figure out whether it makes it make sense to make it a official for and what and so that people can collaborate on it or if it's pretty much done, then it can just become a beer sure.

A

Ok, because yeah I do I, it would be great if we can get something out there like a if it's gonna hang open and have a huge amount of discussion before it could land it'd be nice to have it somewhere. People could like clone and work with and contribute versus waiting for that so yeah.

B

Yeah so I think in a in a week or so we'll have an idea of, but we should have at least something we can share from a concept point of view, and then we can go from there. Mm-Hmm.

A

Okay, yeah. No, that sounds good I think a few people will I'll certainly want to try it out and I suspect a few other people from the team here, as well as other people who, like you, mentioned, we're like talking about this kind of approach,.

B

A

Interesting, like I hadn't thought of the like, so the main problem this is solving is, is the the interfacing back and forth, which I guess you there have been other things talked about, but sounds like this will be an easier or easier way for module owners to move too right.

C

Yeah so because I guess, the needs of a web assembly module on node versus the browser are gonna, be so different. I think it makes a lot of sense to kind of pick like a node specific solution here, yeah so yeah. That's, basically the reasoning behind happy and just the fact that it's so easy to you. But you gives us all the information. We really need to write bindings right. The.

B

Flip side of that argument is that, like the fact that node needs are entirely different solutions and the web means that, like the ecosystem is again like not converging.

D

Yeah yeah well.

B

I think that that's that's an important but I think it's still. It's I think it's something worth considering, but I think that's something we should take up with the web assembly working groups to make sure that the solutions being designed they're actually serving the need of both the web and and.

A

Yeah I mean it's like, because the browser's could support an API like by pulling in support for that into the brow like into the core itself right, yeah I, think that's something eat would ever consider doing well,.

B

I think we need to start so we're actually meeting with some of us have any folks on this problem. The fact that the by DL is not it's not sufficient for for the needs of the native modules for this use case, but ideals doesn't work right. So so, if you are creating something like an API binding through web assembly for node, now the browser's never going to have it so so that tells us that I think there's some problem that we're not solving in a general way on the web assembly side.

B

So it's possible that there's a more generic solution. That can be like this that we agree with that. Everybody can have this API that just works universally everywhere or we take an API as a starting point and iterate from there or we say actually an API is pretty good and that that probably would works even in the browser side. I think those conversations need to be started, I'm, not sure.

B

If anybody's from my point of view, I, don't see too many people thinking about native modules and and web assembly or there doesn't seem to be a lot of practical feedback that I've seen on people for webassembly in node together, it seems like uncharted territory at this point. Okay,.

A

Yeah no be interesting to see some of those discussions like I'd mentioned, like actually an API. The implementations already split out into like a node specific piece, and the piece we think is a generic JavaScript set of API is because there was like another implementation that wanted to use an API, but wouldn't necessarily had to note that, so it might be that that subset would be the thing that would make sense for browsers versus the whole thing, but and yeah so B I'll be interested.

A

Who who or is it you're talking to on the the wasum side? We.

B

Actually talked to at climbed- and he noticed this issue as well so and we're talking to some more folks at Google who were working with assembly on get their take on it and figured out how like what are the right channels to talk about this, so I think it makes sense to look people like to get you all looped into those discussions so once I know, some names that you can talk to I can share them. Okay,.

A

That'd be great and like so I have set up and I'm I, don't I guess I haven't confirmed yet, but for July 8th we're planning a meeting with a few people from the web assembly team, so I, you know you might want to come back and because I think this that, with the you know, the scope of that was to say, like.

A

Let's talk to see if we could understand the the sort of overlap, synergy, non synergy- and you know this- what you've described it kind of been pitched so to say, is like there's that at all within the the sort of approach. How does it line up with you know the future that they see or not right, yeah.

B

Actually that, if that's with some of the folks from Mozilla I, think those would be the good set of people to actually talked about web ideal and its applicability to node as well. Right.

A

So that I think so far it is I can just tell you who, just in case you recognize their names, they find that.

A

So it sounded like so I'd been I started the conversation with with Lynne who said yeah. It sounds like good to get together. It doesn't sound like she'll, be able to make it that day, but till and Luke were the two other people who I'm hoping will still make it on the eighth and yeah.

B

So they should be quite knowledgeable. I think that that would be a good discussion to participation. Okay,.

B

All right, yeah that that was all from our side. We wanted to get this introduced to people and if you have any thoughts or questions or comments, do send them our way and as soon as we have something that we didn't share, that people knew people can play with employed feedback, we'll post it to the the the working group.

A

Sounds great, so ya know thanks a lot for the the presentation and we'll look forward to seeing seeing some of the code and having the future conversations awesome. Thank you. Okay, thanks.

A

Okay, so let's just flip back to our regular agenda, I'm going.

E

She was masked Anse.

E

A

A

Okay, so I've just any other agenda items or things that people want to discuss before we get into the things that are tagged for the milestone.

A

No, okay, I think I opened this one. There was just a feature request, so this had to do with being able to set the length property of functions. I guess.

A

F

A

As I thought that we should probably talk a little bit about and decide if, like that, we think it makes sense.

A

F

Would this be used I'm, just curious, I.

A

Think so I haven't spent enough time. Thinking about it myself, but I think that the number of parameters like you would basically say: I'm telling that I'm creating a parameter, I'm, creating a function and I know that the number of parameters is two, for example, all right I'm, not quite sure how that gets set behind the scenes. Now, yeah.

F

A

I'm, what I'm guessing is that there's some overhead in basically not telling the runtimes or the JavaScript engines how many parameters there are, so that would be more efficient to have flavors. That would let you say, those things: okay,.

A

um But I think I think you know before I could properly answer your question. I need to do some more research myself as well. Okay,.

A

um So maybe, unless, unless we'll leave it on the agenda- and hopefully we'll do that bit basically answer, why it why it really makes sense in terms of efficiency, okay,.

E

A

Let's go back next one. What should go into any pi5 I think we talked about this last week and came up with an answer of what was going to be in five and six. So I, don't think, there's going to be anything there, any anything really new to talk about on this front, unless you guys have something.

G

A

A

We talked about additional asic worker variants, I, don't think, there's anything new on that one either.

A

Happy version and no chip, so nickel I think you were working on that right. Yeah, I.

G

Updated the PR was Gabrielle.

G

Found my typo error, but it's.

G

It's all started: okay,.

A

So in the end we didn't we left having.

G

A

G

What I did here is to retrieve the to expose the knob you as shown and I use it.

G

The native action in the node and skull bash and oth yeah, because it's the real nappy rash on exposed by the runtime yeah.

D

G

And yeah on it don't developer can use the Navy print version viable on binding of Jeep so and it's exported, even if on process, dot I, don't remember precisely hold.

G

G

G

Okay, Porsha's, not counting dot, Bibles.

G

G

We have even if processed versions, dot, nothing so yeah, I, I, tested and.

G

Yeah but the the the the difference is that the Bibles are exploded on.

G

G

Jeep and it's used by no Jeep and you can access to these Bibles on your binding Dorji, so I think that the these was the the engine request and thankful. For me, it's a it's okay, yeah.

A

No, it looks good okay, so this is basically next up on this one is just to get it landed. It looks like to me.

G

A

Aaron even.

A

We have a CI run, so let's just do might as well.

E

Kick this off before we forget just see I.

E

G

No Riteish.

A

G

A

G

Wrong the wrong you own.

A

That's this one right. Yes,.

G

A

Okay, so that other one will not succeed anyway,.

E

Okay, so twenty three nine four four.

E

Am I doing okay? No, it's fine.

E

Twenty seven, eight thirty five or seven eight to five okay. So that's the right.

A

Okay, so that's good go back to the milestone here so that one's good workshop.

A

This one I think Jim. You mentioned that they're all submitted everything.

F

Submitted we should hear back from node J s interactive around July 31st note cough they're, not letting us know when they'll make their decision. Okay, so.

A

F

Got everything submitted yeah.

A

Okay, so nothing, but we might as well leave it till we hear one way or the other we can have it open. I think this one I think this one there's not necessarily I think new there, except that I do know that there'd been some submissions in terms of like a PR to add some new.

A

Some new signatures, so Kevin.

E

A

Sorry go ahead, yeah.

H

It was those three signatures: they're based off of the feedback that we had like a month or two ago, yep.

A

No thanks did that land I'm trying to remember so.

H

That PR is there, as well as some tests.

A

Right I think I actually landed that it's.

H

That it's like the fifth one from the top I mean a callback optional. Okay,.

A

Okay, I'd reviewed it, so yeah I'll probably go ahead and land that there hasn't been any other comments or objections. So.

H

One thing that she did point out was the the use of an API hem over the C++ wrapper YUM. Also another thing that was pointed out by Gabe for the thread safe functions and the person that was working on that PR basically noticed that the code is really half half summer.

D

Ends that you pay.

H

End and sometimes uses the wrapper right, yeah.

A

I mean I think the nappy m'v is the right one and it generally just works out. You know, but yeah I know that's something. Maybe we need to go back and like make an effort to make it consistent.

H

A

No but yeah thanks for doing that and I should get back this week to get that in.

G

Michael, can you see the the first PR? Oh yes, I.

G

Did the review- or these are VI, and here he named it, he he he called it. The meter number value so I'm, not very sure. If it's it's a right name. So just.

A

Wrap, let's take a look, it's.

G

A he are wrapping the.

G

G

A

Okay, so trash.

G

So for me, maybe you have as a result a double that is a number of milliseconds science.

G

For January about, maybe we can call this middle to time. Value I, don't know number value, I'm, not sure about number yeah.

A

I'm trying to think is there like a standard.

A

Try to milliseconds.

A

Order, if just something like Millie's makes any sense.

G

A

That'll confuse people, though, if they think it's just like the Millie's.

E

G

Even if a number could be confused right.

A

Yeah no I know like.

A

Current Milly's.

G

Yeah, it's used in many mailing, which is premier language currently.

A

Writes I'm just wondering if maybe that would be more obvious a date or.

G

Current time me lists.

G

E

I'm, just looking at.

A

Yeah something like current time, Milly's to me sounds like there's no equivalent in JavaScript. Is there oh.

G

H

Just briefly, looking.

G

H

Anything it's only when you type past the date to a primitive number is when you get I, don't see any function, anything but still looking.

A

Others I get milliseconds, although that probably just gets you that's the milliseconds of the date yeah says get them milliseconds from the current date in time. So that doesn't that's not it.

H

Yeah I: it's if you pass the dates to the number constructor constructor you hidden.

G

Yeah there is that there is a the UTC of the middle of the.

G

That returns the number of milliseconds well.

A

Actually now, if you say date dot now, it gives you the number of milliseconds since 1970 Oh, 101 yeah.

G

A

Maybe does it make any sense to just use that.

G

Yeah III I agree. I. Am I I'm asking because the the the first proposal number value.

G

Could be and not top of it, the gold is good. I think that we need to decide the the name right.

A

E

Maybe, like sorry.

G

Michael IIE come meant not here, but maybe.

A

So you added the comments already: okay, a.

F

Moment moment has a.

G

C

F

Has a function called the unit that that returns the UNIX, what they call the UNIX timestamp, so I'm, just throwing that as yeah. How how another package is this.

G

Here, when I'm explaining I'm, not sure about the name of yeah.

A

So we want to say it was like now.

E

E

A

So what was that? You said it was Unix.

F

Yeah in moment, the eunuchs function returns the number of seconds, so one alternative might be eunuchs, ms4, UNIX, milliseconds.

A

Millie's we're.

F

H

I, don't think now really makes sense, because date now is static on the date, but here.

B

H

Date is about the object so saying now we really doesn't make sense to them.

G

Maybe yeah can bring time me lease my lease for it, maybe or UNIX merely so.

A

Yeah, which do we okay, so the date thought now is right: okay, cuz right! That's basically giving you the current time, Millie's not related to what's inside of it. Okay, all right, good, good point to time string to you to string value of so really it's only if you cast it as an effort, it gives you the yeah.

A

Of the ones we've talked about so far, a UNIX millions, like the most obvious to me.

F

Yeah I think it's something people are familiar with, and the the UNIX epoch is pretty standard. Yeah.

G

A

So it doesn't really match. Is that well yeah approximately match? What's cuz, you said they didn't? They used UNIX in the name of a moment, right, mm-hmm.

F

A

H

A

H

Also thinking that you know like since, with the date object when you cast it to a number, that's when it returns that milliseconds, what about having the function? Name number, because a bunch of the other we do have a bunch of.

A

H

Object, boolean for the other and API classes right. It would just be that you know you would have to know that when you cast a date to a number, you get the milliseconds yeah.

F

H

Like lilies, because it's very descriptive in the name, it's just also throwing two number out just to sort of map.

E

Version functions and Simmel.

E

How casting would.

A

What do people think.

A

F

Like the to number, since it's consistent with what the other stuff we've got going,.

H

F

H

The good to number it's the assistant, it's very JavaScript II and in relation to any API, no doubt on API, rather yeah, okay, I'm.

A

Just I'm just taking a quick sorry, I'm.

E

Just looking at the.

A

E

A

Not H because yeah, if the value to number over to string.

A

You can still be Oh Michael.

F

I'm having difficulties hearing hear.

A

F

It could be your microphone Michael.

E

G

There's him here.

F

It's a little bit bit. It started maybe two minutes ago kind of a BEC. Whenever you speak, there's kind of a background, humming sound.

E

A

Okay, is that any better? Oh yes, yeah, yes, I switch microphone so far.

F

A

Was just trying to ask if, like everybody, it sounded like everybody likes to number the best and that's what we should suggest yeah I like that? Okay, so this is the comment I had like from discussion. Any guides meeting we suggest a number it's similar to some of our other conversion. Functions is similar to help casting to to a number best conversion on the JavaScript side, mm-hmm.

F

A

Okay, I will make that.

A

Okay, so we were talking about this one I, don't know Kevin. If you had anything else, you want to add on add on that front.

A

Okay fix object, practice; okay; no, these are pull requests so go back to the milestone.

A

Right because we've started, we were talking about that. Kevin had added PR.

A

So Jim you're working on SQLite or yeah.

F

Yes, I am so in the unit tests. The the vast majority of those are coming from libuv, so I'm now in in the process of understanding how I need to come up to speed on libuv and then understand how SQL lights, using it and.

A

F

Remove that usage and exactly.

A

F

So, anyway, to making progress there, okay sounds good, so.

A

The like I think last we talked you were debugging like a crash or something you've worked around that or know that that's where it's coming from exactly exactly.

F

A

F

Okay, yeah, all of the crashes, seem to be with libuv. Okay, that would.

A

Make some sense, yeah, okay and I- think there's nothing else specific to talk about we're pretty much at the end of the hour. Is there anything else that any of you wanted to bring up or discuss this week? I will not be able to.

F

Be on the call next week, okay,.

A

Okay, thanks for a heads up, anybody else, I'm.

H

Also be gone next week: okay,.

A

Next week is, is it something special or just summer.

A

Yeah no holidays or anything okay, because the next week so I won't be here two weeks from now: okay, because that is Canada Day, so it's a holiday in Canada, so excellent. So.

B

I guess I won't say.

A

See a few view for a few weeks, but we'll talk and get up and whatever, okay, okay, thanks everybody for taking the time and we'll talk to y'all later all right, thanks, bye,.