W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > September 2009

[whatwg] Storage mutex feedback

From: Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 10:41:56 +0900
Message-ID: <5dd9e5c50909031841l1d52b387ube57858c5429abe@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 2:24 AM, timeless <timeless at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 4:06 AM, Ian Hickson<ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
> > Upon further consideration I've renamed getStorageUpdates() to
> > yieldForStorageUpdates().
> If getStorageUpdates() actually returned how *many* updates there
> were, it could be a vaguely useful name.
> If the answer is 0, then my application knows it doesn't need to try
> to figure out how the world changed, right?

I like this idea except for one problem:  It doesn't tell whether something
got changed without your knowledge.  If you call alert, access a plugin, etc
it's possible to drop the lock.  I think some sort of global counter,
variable, etc would be more valuable since it solves both problems.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20090904/78aa34a9/attachment-0001.htm>
Received on Thursday, 3 September 2009 18:41:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:52 UTC