Add missing Bun compatibility data#28592
Conversation
|
Tip: Review these changes grouped by change (recommended for most PRs), or grouped by feature (for large PRs). |
|
@alii Could you help us review these changes? If so, I would recommend looking at the grouped changes in the automated comment above. |
|
Yep, will find some time today. Thank you @RiskyMH for all of these |
|
These changes look fine and are certainly more accurate than the status quo, so LGTM assuming it's acceptable to reconcile any mistakes in the near future (likely this week, if any). Since these changes look "plausibly accurate" @RiskyMH, I've put a message in Bun's team chat asking about the level of confidence we can have in this and future similar changes. |
| "safari": { | ||
| "version_added": false | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note: If Bun supports this, Safari might support this as well!?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I feel like deno & nodejs also should support this too
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/DOMException#browser_compatibility
| "safari": { | ||
| "version_added": false | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note: If Bun supports this, Safari might support this as well!?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is no collector test for this yet.
@RiskyMH Can you share how you tested this? Maybe we can add this as a custom collector test.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah a few of these I wasn't as sure how they worked, so as I mentioned earlier I used claude somewhat to make some initial tests for it. I did check it code & explanation to see if they sounded reasonable to what the docs on mdn had and all though.
For this one in particular it seemed like all it meant was using ArrayBuffer instead of a SharedArrayBuffer
// code it generated to test
Atomics.load(new Int32Array(new ArrayBuffer(4)), 0) // => 0 (not throw)It's another one of the cases where everywhere I tested it also seemed supported too, which i personally hope but it makes it harder to know if it was a bad test
so if this was wrong, I'm sorry and yeah can remove it
Co-authored-by: Claas Augner <495429+caugner@users.noreply.github.com>
|
Also I moved my fork to personal acc so you guys can actually interact with it unlike last time 🤣 |
Summary
There are many things that are missing Bun, so this PR just tries to ensure its accurate!
Test results and supporting details
Worth noting I did use claude code to initially make this diff where it found examples and tried to run the code, but I manually checked most and they seemed to work as expected in Bun (especially checked ones that node/deno doesn't claim here right now)
Also it may be worth for consistency in another pr to have more
falseentries where node/deno has it.Related issues
URLPattern#28593 (another open pr for immediate latest feature)