feat: use uint8 instead of buffer #99
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This was referenced Dec 9, 2022
DiegoRBaquero
approved these changes
Dec 14, 2022
webtorrent-bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 15, 2022
# [4.1.0](v4.0.1...v4.1.0) (2022-12-15) ### Features * use uint8 instead of buffer ([#99](#99)) ([ad7de65](ad7de65))
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 4.1.0 🎉 The release is available on: Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What is the purpose of this pull request? (put an "X" next to item)
[ ] Documentation update
[ ] Bug fix
[ ] New feature
[ ] Other, please explain:
What changes did you make? (Give an overview)
replaced simple-sha1 with uint8-util, thus dropping rusha, replaced all buffer with uint8array
Which issue (if any) does this pull request address?
webtorrent/webtorrent#2390
Is there anything you'd like reviewers to focus on?
Should we construct (u)int16/32 arrays instead of using dataviews?