Re: New name for "AudioWorker"

I'm actually off-the-cuff against trying to boil the ocean of the general
pattern.  This is pretty specific - the new thing , runs *IN* something
that can be a Worker-like process, but they're expected to share the
process.  The thing you can instantiate lots of (runtime contexts?) run
inside that process.

I was expecting we would rename AW to CustomAudioProcessor, still define
them as running inside a Worker (and define how that Worker-sharing works),
and use Worker messaging.  That seemed like the shortest path to success.

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 9:16 AM, Hongchan Choi <hongchan@google.com> wrote:

> Nothing forces workers to be heavy weight, but doesn't it have the
> assumption that it runs on its own thread? What we want is to be able to
> throw JS code into VM that runs on the audio thread.
>
> Perhaps we can break that assumption, and propose a new type of Worker.
>
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 9:09 AM Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Why isn't this thing a worker? What forces workers to be heavyweight?
>>
>> Also, would be good to align with the Houdini folks on this as they're
>> proposing similar things in the rendering and compositing space.
>>
>> Regards
>> On 7 Oct 2015 7:52 a.m., "Paul Adenot" <padenot@mozilla.com> wrote:
>>
>>> We need to decide for a new name for something that:
>>>
>>> - Runs off-main-thread
>>> - Has access to a very limited set of APIs
>>> - Can be instantiated a lot of times in the same document (much more
>>> than Workers can or would)
>>> - Is specialized to one domain (audio, video, etc.)
>>> - ... ?
>>>
>>> It is likely that we would be the first group to spec something like
>>> this, but it would be used by other groups (layout people, video/image
>>> processing folks, etc.). We need something that is not too tied to audio,
>>> or can be adapted. I propose "Processor", which conveys the meaning of
>>> taking something as input, applying a transformation, and outputting it.
>>> I'm very open to suggestions though, this is merely to get the ball rolling.
>>>
>>> Thoughts ?
>>> Paul.
>>>
>>