Migrated the legacy guide Backpressuring in Streams to the learn section #6261
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
|
Lighthouse Results
|
Unit Test Coverage Report
Unit Test Report
|
|
My review:
|
|
Wouldn't it be better to put it in the "module" section/category? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
thanks for starting this work!
as noted in #6228 - can you lightly update the content? here's a couple short observations
- import vs require
- prefer
node:imports when an internal package - streams now have a promise api, negating the need for
promisify
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
| @@ -80,6 +80,12 @@ | |||
| "modules": "Modules", | |||
| "publishingNodeApiModules": "How to publish a Node-API package" | |||
| } | |||
| }, | |||
| "backpressuring": { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The category should be "streams", not "Backpressuring". Can you make these changes? (Since it will require changes in many files?)
Also, the link should probably be /learn/streams/backpressuring-in-streams
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually, this guide should be in the "Modules" category 🤔
|
Can you setup a redirect from the old guide (guides) to the learn page as done in here? |
|
Hi everyone! I'm following this discussion and I opened a new PR #6352 to address the points you guys pointed here. |
|
Closing as superseded by #6352 |
Fixes #6228
Description
Migrated the legacy guide Backpressuring in Streams to the learn section
Validation
Related Issues
Check List
npx turbo lintto ensure the code follows the style guide. And runnpx turbo lint:fixto fix the style errors if necessary.npx turbo formatto ensure the code follows the style guide.npx turbo testto check if all tests are passing.