cli: add --enable-all-experimentals build flag

[ShogunPanda]

This PR adds a new --enable-all-experimentals BUILD flag which can be used to turn ALL experimental features on by default.

[nodejs-github-bot]

Review requested:

• @nodejs/config
• @nodejs/inspector

[aduh95]

That seems like a bad idea; if you want to avoid long commands, use a config file, no?

[marco-ippolito]

why would you want to enable ALL experimental flags? It might have side effects the user is not aware of

[ShogunPanda]

I can document this to be very bad or dangerous.
But I find myself something struggling to remember all the experimental flags I need to enabled.
Also, one thing: can we please start treating users as adults: adding a global flag won't make the runtime more dangerous, to be honest.

[ShogunPanda]

That seems like a bad idea; if you want to avoid long commands, use a config file, no?

Just to enable a bunch of experimental flags you have to create a JSON file with schema and so forth. Seems to be a little overkill.

[marco-ippolito]

Making my objection explicit. The node.config.json exists for this specific reason: improve the dx of having a lot of cli flags. I cannot think a use case where you want to enable all experimental flags. This might cause unexpected effects because the interaction between multiple experimental flag is untested. I'd rather have user write a json file than a dangerous "free for all flag"

[ShogunPanda]

@marco-ippolito I understand your concerns. I disagree, which is totally fine.
Do you think that explicitly stating that is dangerous and also listing out which flags it enables would lift your objection?

[aduh95]

An alternative would be a build/configure flag, would that work for you?

[marco-ippolito]

An alternative would be a build/configure flag, would that work for you?

I'm fine with a build flag

[ShogunPanda]

An alternative would be a build/configure flag, would that work for you?

Do you mean a configure flag that enables the CLI flag on C++ side so that only people with custom build will see it?

If that's the idea, I'm up for it. Good idea. @marco-ippolito Would it solve your objection?

[ShogunPanda]

Amazing. Updating this soon.

[marco-ippolito]

An alternative would be a build/configure flag, would that work for you?

Do you mean a configure flag that enables the CLI flag on C++ side so that only people with custom build will see it?

If that's the idea, I'm up for it. Good idea. @marco-ippolito Would it solve your objection?

yes, I'm fine with it, would be nice to actually have them enabled without a runtime flag (just the build flag) so you can run the test suite and test the interaction among all the experimental features.
This PR only enables an arbitrary subset of experimental features though, not all of them

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 89.68%. Comparing base (2071c44) to head (d2b3548).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #62755      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   89.68%   89.68%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         706      706              
  Lines      218143   218143              
  Branches    41732    41741       +9     
==========================================
- Hits       195650   195635      -15     
- Misses      14402    14440      +38     
+ Partials     8091     8068      -23     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/node_options.h	98.00% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 30 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[ShogunPanda]

@marco-ippolito @aduh95 Updated now. WDYT?

Changed applied

[aduh95]

Suggested change

	'node_enable_experimentals%': 0,
	'node_enable_experimentals%': 'false',

[aduh95]

Shouldn't we simply pass the value rather than using a single use precompile variable?

Suggested change

	['node_enable_experimentals==1', {
	'defines': ['NODE_ENABLE_EXPERIMENTALS'],
	}],
	['true', {
	'defines': ['EXPERIMENTALS_DEFAULT_VALUE=<(node_enable_experimentals)'],
	}],

[ShogunPanda]

@aduh95 How about now?