(Sorry, on vacation, and beach > Web Audio discussions. :) Alex, as we discussed a few weeks ago - glitch-free, reasonably-low-latency audio is something that I just don't believe JS - *as it is today - *can do. On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com> wrote: > Let me be clearer, then: the issue is that it introduces effects to JS > that can't be described *in terms of JS*. It violates the > run-to-completion model of the language without appealing to the turn-based > concurrency model we use everywhere else in the platform. > > > On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> wrote: > >> In addition, I'd ask that you be more explicit than calling this problem >> "data races", because there's clearly some explicit effect you're trying to >> prevent. Any asynchronously-programmable or event-driven system can enable >> developers to introduce race conditions. >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On 7/29/2013 7:05 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Noah Mendelsohn<nrm@arcanedomain.**com<nrm@arcanedomain.com>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >Again, I have no informed opinions on the specific merits, just >>>>> suggesting a >>>>> >useful role the TAG might play to clarify for the many members of the >>>>> >community who are less expert on this than you are. Thank you. >>>>> >>>> >>> I'm not sure we call out data races anywhere, it's something we just >>>> don't do. >>>> >>> >>> Well, my recollection may be faulty, but I think that one of the reasons >>> the TAG took the trouble to formalize things like the architecture document >>> was the belief that it's easier to ask skeptics to stick to rules that have >>> been written down, and especially those that have garnered formal consensus >>> through something like the Recommendation track. >>> >>> Whether it's worth taking a guideline on data races all the way to Rec >>> I'm not sure, but it seems that it would be worth setting it down formally, >>> perhaps in a TAG Finding/blog post/Recommendation or whatever will get the >>> right level of discussion, consensus building, and eventually attention. >>> >>> Certainly, of the many things that have come up recently relating to >>> APIs, this one seems deeply architectural and very much within the TAG's >>> remit. >>> >>> Noah >>> >>> >> >
Received on Monday, 5 August 2013 01:46:40 UTC