Skip to content

test changing common.PORT to use 0 within the test-cluster-dgram.reus… #12932

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Closed
akopcz2 wants to merge 8 commits into from
Closed

test changing common.PORT to use 0 within the test-cluster-dgram.reus… #12932

Changes from 6 commits
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
bf452e2
test changing common.PORT to use 0 within the test-cluster-dgram.reus…
akopcz2 May 9, 2017
55107dc
Removing for loop and creating a seperate socket within test-cluster-…
akopcz2 May 10, 2017
49ffe2d
Updating code structure to pass lint within test-cluster-dgram-reuse.js
akopcz2 May 10, 2017
0be4a6e
enabling es lint and refactoring socket function within test-cluster-…
akopcz2 May 10, 2017
7db0f60
enabling es lint and refactoring socket function within test-cluster-…
akopcz2 May 10, 2017
e4f250a
creating second socket to pass to next function to test multiple sock…
akopcz2 May 11, 2017
41292b7
updating socket2 to be equal to dgram.createSocket function not socke…
akopcz2 May 11, 2017
35b3d29
Merge branch 'master' into test-cluster-dgram-reuse.js
akopcz2 May 20, 2017
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
8 changes: 6 additions & 2 deletions test/parallel/test-cluster-dgram-reuse.js
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -36,5 +36,9 @@ function close() {
cluster.worker.disconnect();
}

for (let i = 0; i < 2; i++)
dgram.createSocket({ type: 'udp4', reuseAddr: true }).bind(common.PORT, next);
const socket = dgram.createSocket({type: 'udp4', reuseAddr: true})
.bind(0, common.mustCall(() => {
const socket2 = socket();
Copy link
Contributor

@cjihrig cjihrig May 11, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

socket() looks incorrect to me. Should this be dgram.createSocket()?

Copy link
Author

@akopcz2 akopcz2 May 11, 2017 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I was under the impression that calling socket() was the same as dgram.createSocket since I declared socket as a const. I updated the code here 41292b7

socket.bind(this.address().port, next);
Copy link
Member

@Trott Trott May 11, 2017 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This runs bind twice on the socket but the existing test runs createSocket() twice and this runs it only once. But running it twice is what is actually being tested here, I think. So this invalidates the test, I think.

Copy link
Author

@akopcz2 akopcz2 May 11, 2017 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@Trott Thanks! That makes sense. Would calling another socket inside the callback here work e4f250a ?

Copy link
Contributor

@refack refack May 20, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not so happy about this rebind, you could just do next.call(this).

socket2.bind(this.address().port, next);
}));