W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2011

Re: [chromium-html5] LocalStorage inside Worker

From: Keean Schupke <keean@fry-it.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 18:31:16 +0000
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=ubH-Mfm7A+66WWt+wP5iAwSQwGPdVtxO0vDfe@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org>
Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, public-webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>, Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>, Keean Schupke <keean@fry-it.com>, robert@ocallahan.org
Allow access only from serialized callbacks in workers.

Cheers
Keean
On 11 Jan 2011 14:45, "Jeremy Orlow" <jorlow@chromium.org> wrote:
> So what's the plan for localStorage in workers?
>
> J
>
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 9:10 AM, Keean Schupke <keean@fry-it.com> wrote:
>
>> I think I already came to the same conclusion... JavaScript has no
control
>> over effects, which devalues STM. In the absence of effect control,
apparent
>> serialisation (of transactions) is the best you can do.
>>
>> What we need is a purely functional JavaScript, it makes threading so
much
>> easier ;-)
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Keean.
>>
>>
>> On 10 January 2011 23:42, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> wrote:
>>
>>> STM is not a panacea. Read
>>>
http://www.bluebytesoftware.com/blog/2010/01/03/ABriefRetrospectiveOnTransactionalMemory.aspxifyou
haven't already.
>>>
>>> In Haskell, where you have powerful control over effects, it may work
>>> well, but Javascript isn't anything like that.
>>>
>>> Rob
>>> --
>>> "Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians,
for
>>> they received the message with great eagerness and examined the
Scriptures
>>> every day to see if what Paul said was true." [Acts 17:11]
>>>
>>
>>
Received on Tuesday, 11 January 2011 18:31:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:42 GMT