Re: Exposing structured clone as an API? from Martin Thomson on 2015-04-23 (public-webapps@w3.org from April to June 2015)

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 15:48:52 -0700
To: Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@chromium.org>
Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, kg@luminance.org, Ted Mielczarek <ted@mozilla.com>
Message-ID: <CABkgnnXBykmQzeS2Z8SNY1mjGyZm0G-nD7G7oJx=SyVYWsCtzg@mail.gmail.com>

On 23 April 2015 at 15:34, Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@chromium.org> wrote:
> Have you benchmarked this? I think you're better off just writing your own
> clone library.

Not really the point of my mail.  Of course you would be better
writing a real clone.

It could probably even be synchronous, though it removes this (or a
less bad version, see Maceij's comments) as a polyfill option.

Received on Thursday, 23 April 2015 22:49:18 UTC