Honor buffer.byteOffset in read/write for nodefs #25977
Merged
+16
−8
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
inolen
force-pushed
the
nodefs_byte_offset
branch
3 times, most recently
from
e592e31 to
3ff825e
Compare
Collaborator
Author
|
The change started out by adding buffer.byteOffset to offset (hence the description) but then ended by just getting rid of the additional array view. Digging through the history, it seems that may have originated from the original code, where it seems the node.js fs APIs didn't accept a TypedArray - just a node Buffer instance. |
sbc100
reviewed
Dec 18, 2025
test/fs/test_writeFile.cpp
Outdated
| const buf = Uint8Array.from('c=3\nd=4\ne=5', x => x.charCodeAt(0)); | ||
| FS.writeFile("testfile", "a=1\nb=2\n"); | ||
| FS.writeFile("testfile", new Uint8Array([99, 61, 51]) /* c=3 */, { flags: "a" }); | ||
| FS.writeFile("testfile", buf.subarray(4, 7), { flags: "a" }); |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe leave the comment here but change it do /* d=4 */?
test/fs/test_writeFile.cpp
Outdated
| const buf = Uint8Array.from('c=3\nd=4\ne=5', x => x.charCodeAt(0)); | ||
| FS.writeFile("testfile", "a=1\nb=2\n"); | ||
| FS.writeFile("testfile", new Uint8Array([99, 61, 51]) /* c=3 */, { flags: "a" }); | ||
| FS.writeFile("testfile", buf.subarray(4, 7), { flags: "a" }); |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would this new test code not work with the old nodefs code? (i.e. could you land the test change first without it breaking?)
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The test fails on both nodefs / noderawfs.
sbc100
approved these changes
Dec 18, 2025
This change started out by adding buffer.byteOffset to offset (hence the description) but ended by just getting rid of the additional array view. Digging through the history, it seems that may have originated from the original code, when the node.js fs APIs didn't accept a TypedArray - just a node Buffer instance
inolen
force-pushed
the
nodefs_byte_offset
branch
from
3ff825e to
0708a96
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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.
I ran into this when writing a bunch of files from a tar archive to the file system, where each file was a subarray of the main buffer.