Fixes typo in pull request 3607

[dancingfrog]

See comment on #3607 (comment)

[lidel]

@dancingfrog not sure if this change is needed, need more info.

1. How are you using js-ipfs? In browser? Node? Electron?
2. How are you building it?

[dancingfrog]

@lidel

@dancingfrog not sure if this change is needed...

I'm guessing you did not follow the link to the comment. Otherwise you are saying that this typo on line 75 of packages/ipfs-http-gateway/src/index.js is not a problem

js-ipfs/packages/ipfs-http-gateway/src/index.js

Line 75 in 5ddd0c5

const gatewayAddrs = addresses?.Gateway || []

[lidel]

Hm.. iiuc ?. is not a typo, it is Optional Chaining and is used in other places as well:

Click to see use of ?. in js-ipfs codebase

./packages/ipfs-http-gateway/src/index.js
75:    const gatewayAddrs = addresses?.Gateway || []

./packages/ipfs/test/interface-http-js.js
6:const isFirefox = globalThis.navigator?.userAgent?.toLowerCase().includes('firefox')

./packages/ipfs/test/interface-http-go.js
6:const isFirefox = globalThis.navigator?.userAgent?.toLowerCase().includes('firefox')

./packages/ipfs-core/test/create-node.spec.js
73:    const peerId = await PeerId.createFromPrivKey(`${config.Identity?.PrivKey}`)
129:    expect(config.Identity?.PrivKey.length).is.below(1024)
176:    expect(config.Addresses?.Swarm).to.eql(['/ip4/127.0.0.1/tcp/9977'])

./packages/ipfs-core/test/init.spec.js
96:    const peerId = await PeerId.createFromPrivKey(`${config.Identity?.PrivKey}`)
104:    const peerId = await PeerId.createFromPrivKey(`${config.Identity?.PrivKey}`)
112:    const peerId = await PeerId.createFromPrivKey(`${config.Identity?.PrivKey}`)
127:    expect(config.Identity?.PrivKey.length).is.above(256)
134:    expect(config.Identity?.PeerID).is.equal('QmRsooYQasV5f5r834NSpdUtmejdQcpxXkK6qsozZWEihC')
141:    expect(config.Identity?.PeerID).is.equal('12D3KooWRm8J3iL796zPFi2EtGGtUJn58AG67gcqzMFHZnnsTzqD')
148:    expect(config.Identity?.PeerID).is.equal('16Uiu2HAm5qw8UyXP2RLxQUx5KvtSN8DsTKz8quRGqGNC3SYiaB8E')
179:    expect(config.Discovery?.MDNS?.Enabled).to.be.true()

./packages/ipfs-http-server/src/index.js
139:    const enableCors = Boolean(cors.origin?.length)

./packages/ipfs-grpc-server/src/utils/web-socket-server.js
112:  const grpcAddr = config.Addresses?.RPC

./packages/ipfs-core/test/utils/mock-preload-node.js
31:    if (req.url?.startsWith('/api/v0/refs')) {

./packages/interface-ipfs-core/src/config/profiles/apply.js
31:      expect(diff.original.Swarm?.ConnMgr?.LowWater).to.not.equal(diff.updated.Swarm?.ConnMgr?.LowWater)
34:      expect(newConfig.Swarm?.ConnMgr?.LowWater).to.equal(diff.updated.Swarm?.ConnMgr?.LowWater)

That is why I ask how you are using and building this code, because it looks like a problem with your build setup or the way we support TS, not the ipfs-http-gateway code itself.

[dancingfrog]

Thanks for explaining, @lidel

Hm.. iiuc ?. is not a typo, it is Optional Chaining and is used in other places as well:

So, in spite of the .js extension, that file is actually supposed to be transpiled with a TypeScript interpreter?

To answer your question, yes, I'm using Node to call this function, which works as soon as you remove the part of the syntax that is invalid JavaScript. TypeScript files usually use a .ts extension and mixing TypeScript syntax into presumed JavaScript code will lead to all kinds of problems. Maybe you can close this, while providing a link to what ever documentation explains why js-ipfs uses the .js file extension for TypeScript source code.

[dancingfrog]

After spending more time going through index.js I have concluded that this file is definitely not TypeScript... none of the variables have type declarations, which will always be an implicit error (Parameter 'XXX' implicitly has an 'any' type.). The content of index.s is certainly intended to be interpreted as JavaScript, so the use of the ?. syntax is an error in this context.

[achingbrain]

This is not a TypeScript project, you are quite right. The optional chaining operator is available in JavaScript, but it is only supported by node 14+.

Are you using an older version?

[dancingfrog]

Yup, v12.19.0 I guess it would help you out if Node version were a parameter of the issue report template. So, basically js-ipfs supports ECMAScript 2020 at *minimum*? I think that should be boldly stated in some early and prominent section of the documentation. Peace & Love, John ❤

…

On Tue, Nov 9, 2021, 3:14 AM Alex Potsides ***@***.***> wrote: This is not a TypeScript project, you are quite right. The optional chaining <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Operators/Optional_chaining> operator is available in JavaScript, but it is only supported by node 14+. Are you using an older version? — You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#3918 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AC6N3X3K4QSVNPCAUDEOMDLULDJ6FANCNFSM5F2S6VNA> . Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS <https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675> or Android <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub>.