Repository navigation
docs: clarify JSON output stream behavior - #1522
Closed
rksharma-owg wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
rksharma-owg wants to merge 1 commit into
rksharma-owg wants to merge 1 commit into
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Related to #1505; documents the current behavior discussed in #1511 without changing the API.
The output formatters consume combined stdout and stderr (
stdall). This means.json()can throw when a command writes valid JSON to stdout and progress messages to stderr. The two documentation pages now explain this and showJSON.parse(output.stdout)as the workaround.The example was checked using a real child process that emits JSON on stdout and progress on stderr: parsing stdout succeeds and
.json()throws. Current main uses the same implementation. No runtime code or dependencies change.Validation compares the contribution with unchanged main (
65fc542d88baac578967e22bea28cb610976578c) using the same Node 24/Linux checks. Build, formatting, size, license, types, and circular-dependency checks passed in the initial comparison. Unit/coverage, dependency audit, and docs build failed on both trees; the docs build reports the same esbuild target/destructuring error. These failures have not been hidden or repaired in this documentation change.The completed comparison is 37560134507, which tested
e39da1cf31566246dc52463fa44b2bdcdb690521. The signed contributione5ba4fbd7b21748aa499d057decee5a661544ff2has exactly the same file tree. A fresh signed-head comparison has been triggered but is queued without assigned runners; it is not counted as passing.This PR is a draft: the Tests and Review declarations below remain unchecked.
npm buildbefore committing and verified the bundle updates correctly.run testand confirmed all tests succeed. Added tests to cover my changes if needed.