Re: crypto-ISSUE-22: Should CryptoOperations be clonable [Web Cryptography API] from David Dahl on 2012-08-20 (public-webcrypto@w3.org from August 2012)

From: David Dahl <ddahl@mozilla.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 09:34:01 -0700 (PDT)
To: Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com>
Cc: Web Cryptography Working Group <public-webcrypto@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1797025753.4428374.1345480441622.JavaMail.root@mozilla.com>

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ryan Sleevi" <sleevi@google.com>
> To: "Web Cryptography Working Group" <public-webcrypto@w3.org>
> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 9:35:09 AM
> Subject: Re: crypto-ISSUE-22: Should CryptoOperations be clonable [Web  Cryptography API]

> I'm not really sure it makes sense for CryptoOperation to be
> clonable.
+1

> The use cases for it are not really clear to me (hence #2 there), so
> it would be good to understand.
> 
> I would expect that this would be an area for implementations to tune
> accordingly, much like they do other potentially intensive uses of
> resources (eg: WebGL), where they can re-use or share contexts
> between
> multiple distinct operations, as long as their states have
> transitioned accordingly.
> 
I worry about the complexity of the implementation and the memory management issues this will bring up.

Cheers,

David

Received on Monday, 20 August 2012 16:34:28 UTC