async_hooks: add using scopes to AsyncLocalStorage

[Qard]

Adds support for using scope = storage.withScope(data) to do the equivalent of a storage.run(data, fn) with using syntax. This enables avoiding unnecessary closures.

cc @nodejs/diagnostics

[Flarna]

I guess this replaces #58104 right?

[Qard]

Ah, yes. Forgot that one existed. 😅

[github-actions]

Failed to start CI

   ⚠  No approving reviews found
   ✘  Refusing to run CI on potentially unsafe PR

https://github.com/nodejs/node/actions/runs/21678728231

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 89.75%. Comparing base (5e818c9) to head (09cb6ad).
⚠️ Report is 17 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #61674      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   89.74%   89.75%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         674      675       +1     
  Lines      204389   204428      +39     
  Branches    39280    39284       +4     
==========================================
+ Hits       183424   183480      +56     
- Misses      13264    13265       +1     
+ Partials     7701     7683      -18     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...nternal/async_local_storage/async_context_frame.js	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
lib/internal/async_local_storage/async_hooks.js	98.03% <100.00%> (+0.08%)	⬆️
lib/internal/async_local_storage/run_scope.js	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 28 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.

[nodejs-github-bot]

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/71216/

[Flarna]

Maybe adapt to following to better verify that second call does nothing:

  storage.enterWith('test2');
  assert.strictEqual(storage.getStore(), 'test2');

  // Double dispose should be idempotent
  scope[Symbol.dispose]();
  assert.strictEqual(storage.getStore(), 'test2');

[Flarna]

Suggested change

	using scope = asyncLocalStorage.withScope('my-store');
	using _ = asyncLocalStorage.withScope('my-store');

I think this is the usual guideline if unused. Feel free to ignore.

[Flarna]

Suggested change

	using scope = asyncLocalStorage.withScope('my-store');
	using _ = asyncLocalStorage.withScope('my-store');

[Flarna]

Suggested change

	using scope = asyncLocalStorage.withScope('my-store');
	using _ = asyncLocalStorage.withScope('my-store');

[Flarna]

Suggested change

	using scope = asyncLocalStorage.withScope('my-store');
	using _ = asyncLocalStorage.withScope('my-store');

[legendecas]

We should document the caveat that this cause side effects outside of an async function scope if this is called before the first await:

async function foo() {
  using value = als.withScope(newValue);
  await 0;
}

foo() // no await
al's.getStore() // value changed.