W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-audio@w3.org > July to September 2013

Re: [web-audio-api] (JSWorkers): ScriptProcessorNode processing in workers (#113)

From: Olivier Thereaux <notifications@github.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 07:29:41 -0700
To: WebAudio/web-audio-api <web-audio-api@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <WebAudio/web-audio-api/issues/113/24244305@github.com>
> [Original comment](https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17415#3) by Marcus Geelnard (Opera) on W3C Bugzilla. Mon, 11 Jun 2012 15:00:14 GMT

While I agree that workers are slightly more cumbersome to work with than regular callbacks, I think that there are some risks with supporting both methods:

1) It's generally confusing to have two options for doing the same thing. It's quite likely that developers will pick the "wrong" solution just because they copied from an example or tutorial that used the alternative that wasn't optimal for the actual use case at hand. 

2) I suspect that the callback based approach will be more sensitive to browser/system variations (e.g. different painting/event/animation architectures), which means that it's more likely that someone will design an app on his/hers system+browser combination of preference, and then it will suffer from latency problems on another system+browser combination. This is less likely to be the case if people are always forced to use workers, where the problem should be less pronounced.

3) Since the non-worker option is generally simpler to grasp, it's more likely to be used in more apps than it should.

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/WebAudio/web-audio-api/issues/113#issuecomment-24244305
Received on Wednesday, 11 September 2013 14:30:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:11 UTC