doc: remove --expose-gc flag from CLI documentation

[dario-piotrowicz]

The CLI documentation for --expose-gc has been added in #53078

However it's removal was requested in #53078 (comment) (since this is not something users should generally rely on), but the documentation wasn't fully removed from the PR before it landed.

So I believe that the flag being documented might have been an oversight.

Original context: #58878 (comment)

---

Note: I'm trying to figure out here if --expose-gc should or not be documented in the CLI documentation, and if it should be I would be inclined to also include it in the manpage for consistency 🤔

---

Note: I wanted to also mention that the flag is also included in the allowed v8 options and the useful v8 options
(meaning that even after removing the cli flag section some references to it, for advanced users, will still be present in the document)

[jakecastelli]

This one feels similar to the --expose-internals CLI flag which exists but not documented.

We use --expose-internals exclusively in Core for various testing purposes but outside of core development it is not encouraged.

[juanarbol]

However it's removal was requested in #53078 (comment) (since this is not something users should generally rely on), but the documentation wasn't fully removed from the PR before it landed.

The docs are pretty much the usage at runtime and what is does (the idea behind documenting stuff), which is inherit from V8. I did not introduced the flag per se, I just added it to the CLI available options, I don't think we should remove the documentation, when the documentation is just showing the usage and that it is part of the available CLI options.

I don't think it is the right thing to do, each flag should be documented; but feel free to land this; I'm not blocking anything.

[dario-piotrowicz]

However it's removal was requested in #53078 (comment) (since this is not something users should generally rely on), but the documentation wasn't fully removed from the PR before it landed.

The docs are pretty much the usage at runtime and what is does (the idea behind documenting stuff), which is inherit from V8. I did not introduced the flag per se, I just added it to the CLI available options, I don't think we should remove the documentation, when the documentation is just showing the usage and that it is part of the available CLI options.

I don't think it is the right thing to do, each flag should be documented; but feel free to land this; I'm not blocking anything.

Hey @juanarbol 🙂

Thanks a lot for chipping in 🙏

I see your point but I also see that we have various v8 flags that are not documented (and some that are) so I do believe that there's unclarity on this 🤔

I think that ideally we should only document the flags that node specifically implements, the V8 flags that it supports should be just listed (as they are here: available v8 options)

And the nodejs docs should simply then refer to the the V8 official documentation regarding the flags that it supports...

The problem being that I can't seem to find any official V8 documentation regarding the supported flags... any idea if there is one? 🫤

[juanarbol]

The V8 team is not that good documenting flags as well. From my personal experience, I just have to look at this file https://github.com/v8/v8/blob/b5b7de9cc158c9d4dc038841e5935c49e4764d7e/src/flags/flag-definitions.h#L2594

Again, this is not a blocker, but I don't see this adding any actual value but making things a bit more confusing. I know Node.js has a mess w/ node options and CLI options, but removing docs is not the answer IMHO.

However it's removal was requested in #53078 (comment) (since this is not something users should generally rely on), but the documentation wasn't fully removed from the PR before it landed.

The requested removal of the docs was something about V8 I wrote about. Not the CLI entry and usage.