Re: [streams] Requirement on promises equality (#266)

> I'm concerned about the spec complexity. .ready and .closed changed in recent two weeks.

I apologize for the churn :(. The reader stuff certainly shook things up. Hopefully should be pretty stable now...

> Currently they are defined very cleanly, but can we keep the readability when we start caching?

I don't quite understand. The definition should not change due to caching. (In fact I don't think of "caching" as a separate thing; they are just getters for values which sometimes change and sometimes don't. Similar to `state`.)

> FYI, as @tyoshino said, we have some difficulties to ensure the identity. Currently I'm not sure if it is worth ensuring.

Well, they have to have identity for the getters, otherwise `stream.ready !== stream.ready`. My question was more about the methods.

> Can we ensure p === q === r?

I don't think so, unless we significantly change the ergonomics of how readers work. Since `rs.ready` must never fulfill for a locked stream and `reader.ready` must definitely fulfill for a reader for a locked stream that becomes readable, I don't see how to make these compatible.


---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/streams/issues/266#issuecomment-72598563