Fix require warning with tests from stdin

[mstoykov]

What?

Why?

Checklist

• I have performed a self-review of my code.
• I have added tests for my changes.
• I have run linter locally (make lint) and all checks pass.
• I have run tests locally (make tests) and all tests pass.
• I have commented on my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas.

Related PR(s)/Issue(s)

[mstoykov]

This specifically fixes #3534 (comment) and related problems

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 86.66667% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 71.84%. Comparing base (44d7840) to head (e121e12).

❗ Current head e121e12 differs from pull request most recent head ca166df

Please upload reports for the commit ca166df to get more accurate results.

Files	Patch %	Lines
js/modules/require_impl.go	86.66%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #3774      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   71.86%   71.84%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         291      291              
  Lines       21249    21255       +6     
==========================================
  Hits        15270    15270              
- Misses       4917     4921       +4     
- Partials     1062     1064       +2     

Flag	Coverage Δ
ubuntu	71.78% <86.66%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
windows	71.71% <86.66%> (-0.01%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[joanlopez]

Nit; out of curiosity - if we normally use *lib.RuntimeOptions, is there any reason why not using it here instead of the value? 🤔

[mstoykov]

Do you mean instead of using opts?

We can - but this is a copy of the helper function just above here that does a very similar thing, but doesn't go through stdin.

I kind of prefered to not rewrite the whole funciton, and me trying to add it to the above was pretty painful and ended up being way bigger change.

So in the interest of not having to have a huge change (across everything using the above helper) - I decided to copy it and leave everything but what I need as it is.
If we add more tests for executing from stdin - this will likely need most of the other options and stuff.

[joanlopez]

No, no, I was asking value vs ref.

[mstoykov]

oh. Looking at it we basically have a pointer ... for no reason. It is used to check if it was set - but then we just set it to the empty ones, so IMO we probably can move to a not pointer variant.