Conversation
26f5680 to
7556c9e
Compare
|
Name sounds good to me; i don't think it should be in Is there any way to have tests that actually verify that the expected colors show up on supported platforms? |
cjihrig
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Left some preliminary comments.
Is there any way to have tests that actually verify that the expected colors show up on supported platforms?
test/parallel/test-util-format.js and test/parallel/test-util-inspect.js might be good places to look for examples.
Also cc @BridgeAR who might be interested since this overlaps with the color support in util.inspect().
| function colorText(format, text) { | ||
| validateString(format, 'format'); | ||
| validateString(text, 'text'); | ||
| const formatCodes = inspect.colors[format]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If this is going to be public API, we should probably provide some additional validation for supported formats.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
additional validation
like?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was thinking we could validate that format is actually something supported by inspect.colors, but feel free to ignore if you want.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If they pass anything apart as of now, we are just returning the text as in, do you feel it makes sense to check if the format is supported by inspect.colors and throw an error for non-supported inputs?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, that's what I originally meant.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is inspect.colors mutable and exposed to users?
9c94ffe to
9ac1a84
Compare
|
Micro-nit on the commit message: The verb in the first line of the commit message should be imperative. In other words, |
9ac1a84 to
7cd400f
Compare
|
Thanks for the clarification @Trott. I had that doubt, fixed it. |
|
We should also add this to the |
|
Yes, this would require a docs update. |
01a77c8 to
ccfdcee
Compare
ccfdcee to
9da85fe
Compare
|
Is this ready enough? |
cjihrig
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Left a few comments. It would be good for others to weigh in on things like the overall API design and whether or not we should make this experimental first.
doc/api/util.md
Outdated
| added: v18.3.0 | ||
| --> | ||
|
|
||
| * `format` {string} `format` one of the color format from `util.inspect.colors` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should probably link util.inspect.colors to https://nodejs.org/api/util.html#customizing-utilinspect-colors.
| Takes `format` and `text` and retuns the colored text form | ||
|
|
||
| ```js | ||
| const util = require('node:util'); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you remove this line. Otherwise we'll need to show the same example code for CJS and ESM.
| const util = require('node:util'); | ||
|
|
||
| console.log(util.colorText('red', 'This text shall be in red color')); | ||
| // ^ '\u001b[31mThis text shall be in red color\u001b[39m' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| // ^ '\u001b[31mThis text shall be in red color\u001b[39m' | |
| // ^ '\u001b[31mThis text shall be colored red\u001b[39m' |
| function colorText(format, text) { | ||
| validateString(format, 'format'); | ||
| validateString(text, 'text'); | ||
| const formatCodes = inspect.colors[format]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, that's what I originally meant.
| assert.throws(() => { | ||
| util.colorText('red', undefined); | ||
| }, { | ||
| code: 'ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE', | ||
| message: 'The "text" argument must be of type string. Received undefined' | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wouldn't this already be tested on line 20 when invalidOption is undefined?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Right, this should rather be util.colorText(undefined, undefined);
| const util = require('node:util'); | ||
|
|
||
| console.log(util.colorText('red', 'This text shall be in red color')); | ||
| // ^ '\u001b[31mThis text shall be in red color\u001b[39m' |
| function colorText(format, text) { | ||
| validateString(format, 'format'); | ||
| validateString(text, 'text'); | ||
| const formatCodes = inspect.colors[format]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is inspect.colors mutable and exposed to users?
Co-authored-by: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Jordan Harband <ljharb@gmail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am hesitant to add new formatting functionalities to util (console does not seem ideal either). I just opened a something similar API: #43523. It does a bit more by also allowing nested colors, this functionality here does not do that (e.g., colorText('green', 'green ' + colorText('red', 'red') + ' green') would end up being colored: green red defaultColor instead of green red green).
|
Let's throw this into the TSC agenda as part of the discussion for #43523 |
|
Dropping it from the tsc-agenda until #43382 is resolved. |
| added: REPLACEME | ||
| --> | ||
|
|
||
| * `format` {string} A color format defined in `util.inspect.colors`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Accepting string | string[] would be really helpful to e.g. make text both a certain color and underline/italic/bold/... at the same time
|
Superseded by #51850 |
This is with reference to the comment in #42770
A few things to finalize before completing this draft PR:
consoleAPI?//cc @nodejs/util