Re: [whatwg/fetch] WIP: Cancelation (#523)

FWIW, I think I'm generally on board with @jakearchibald's approach. I think the difficulty is in part with the "in parallel" language. In practice the fetch algorithm is more of a thread (at least from the point where we use "in parallel") that uses sub-threads for certain tasks that are currently blocking in the specification (such as sending or receiving a byte sequence).

However, until we have explicit threads there's not really a way to write it down as such. And rewriting the fetch algorithm as more of an event-loop based operation might also be somewhat tricky.

If @domenic wants to double down on JavaScript vs system layer separation I'd be okay with that (and might help implementers a bit), but then we should do the same for streams. That also doesn't really preclude using signals I think. We'd just need to be able to use them abstractly and make the JavaScript API a wrapper.

-- 
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/pull/523#issuecomment-315739790