-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 189
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
leak #3
Comments
please, consider applying http://busybox.net/~dvv/luv-1.patch:
|
Closed
This was referenced Sep 24, 2019
squeek502
added a commit
to squeek502/luv
that referenced
this issue
May 10, 2020
The magic -1 was not very user friendly and wasn't documented, and making it an optional argument makes the most sense to me. This is fully backwards compatible, and will also error on cases where the offset could be used as a callback, but the user probably didn't intend it to be the callback, like: uv.fs_read(fd, 32, function() end, function() end) which will give the error bad argument luvit#3 to 'fs_read' (number expected, got function)
squeek502
added a commit
to squeek502/luv
that referenced
this issue
May 10, 2020
The magic -1 was not very user friendly and wasn't documented, and making it an optional argument makes the most sense to me. This is fully backwards compatible, and will also error on cases where the offset could be used as a callback, but the user probably didn't intend it to be the callback, like: uv.fs_read(fd, 32, function() end, function() end) which will give the error bad argument luvit#3 to 'fs_read' (number expected, got function)
squeek502
added a commit
to squeek502/luv
that referenced
this issue
May 10, 2020
The magic -1 was not very user friendly and wasn't documented, and making it an optional argument makes the most sense to me. This is fully backwards compatible, and will also error on cases where the offset could be used as a callback, but the user probably didn't intend it to be the callback, like: uv.fs_read(fd, 32, function() end, function() end) which will give the error bad argument luvit#3 to 'fs_read' (number expected, got function)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
leakage described in creationix/moonslice-luv#1 resides in pure luv, since the following code (barebone pseudo-HTTP server) shows constant growth of memory usage:
please, consider fixing. tia
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: