Tim Caswell
Tim Caswell
@mamod sounds great, let me know if you hit any more issues at the duktape/libuv layer.
@mamod, in particular, I'm not happy with how dukluv currently does objects. If you can think of a better API style, I'm all ears.
@radare, "making it node compatible" is no small task. Rewriting luv (lua + libuv bindings) took me a few weeks of full-time work. I've spent over a year working on...
delete is not the same as setting to nil. This is not lua. Candor allows having properties that point to nil. This makes JSON interop much easier for example. As...
I believe so yes. If not, it should. I know I asked for this with "new" and I assume the logic is the same for all keywords.
right, "new" was renamed to "clone". But it was "new" when I had @indutny make sure it could be used for other stuff.
There should be links in the top linking back to the original document. What page in particular is missing a link? For example http://nodemanual.org/latest/js_doc/Date.html has a link to https://developer.mozilla.org/en/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Date
@davidfowl I did at one point experiment with wrapping existing libuv with a C layer that exposed it as pull based. I never could get it very efficient, but depending...
I wasn't sure libuv would take my suggested change either. My backup plan is to see if I can wrap libuv in some C code that exposes what I want....
I don't understand the issue about exposing internals. Libuv already has the practice of not exposing private struct members in the main uv.h file. I don't need any more data...