Re: [whatwg/fetch] Request should allow WritableStream as body (#378)

The problem essentially is that `Request`s, as specified in Fetch, are timeless objects that can be carted around and used. They aren't tied to a specific actual fetch() call (i.e. a specific actual request). This means that associating a writable stream with each Request gets strange, as you have to then hook up the writable stream to a specific "actual writable stream" when the fetch() happens.

The design we settled on was instead that you could have a `Request` with a body that is a readable stream, which gets carted around along with the timeless `Request` object. Then, `fetch()` takes care of doing an invisible `request.body.pipeTo(writableStreamRepresentingThisFetch)` behind the scenes, once we've figured out what that `writableStreamRepresentingThisFetch` is. But `writableStreamRepresentingThisFetch` is never exposed to the user, by the nature of the timeless-Request model.

-- 
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/fetch/issues/378#issuecomment-254613664