Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

doc: improve wording in vm.md and esm.md #32427

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 24, 2020
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions doc/api/esm.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -620,8 +620,8 @@ stateless):

##### Approach #2: Isolate State

The most straightforward `package.json` would be one that defines the separate
CommonJS and ES module entry points directly:
A `package.json` file can define the separate CommonJS and ES module entry
points directly:

<!-- eslint-skip -->
```js
Expand Down
5 changes: 2 additions & 3 deletions doc/api/vm.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -362,9 +362,8 @@ specification.

Unlike `vm.Script` however, every `vm.Module` object is bound to a context from
its creation. Operations on `vm.Module` objects are intrinsically asynchronous,
in contrast with the synchronous nature of `vm.Script` objects. With the help
of async functions, however, manipulating `vm.Module` objects is fairly
straightforward.
in contrast with the synchronous nature of `vm.Script` objects. The use of
'async' functions can help with manipulating `vm.Module` objects.

Using a `vm.Module` object requires three distinct steps: creation/parsing,
linking, and evaluation. These three steps are illustrated in the following
Expand Down