Re: [whatwg/streams] Aborting a writable stream should not abort writes in progress (#611)

I had been thinking that `.abort()` should make the WritableStream to mark everything on it including `.closed` , pending `.write()`s and active `.write()` as aborted. I.e. almost in the same expectation as `.cancel()`.

I don't object to the change. I agree that `.closed` should be delayed if we allow the active `.write()` to be fulfilled/rejected with the actual result of the corresponding `.write()` on the sink. Wait for the active `.write()`, reject all the pending `.write()`s and then `.closed`.

One more point we should clarify. If the in-flight operation is `.close()`, we `abort()`-ed but it finished successfully, I think we should move the WritableStream into `"closed"` state as well as `.write()`s fulfills regardless of `.abort()`. Do you agree?


-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/streams/issues/611#issuecomment-261474337