Re: [whatwg/streams] Assert there are no pending reads when releasing lock (#1168)

Interesting. I think I like that idea. And we could add `getReader({ signal })` as additional sugar for this behavior, similar to how `addEventListener(, { signal })` gives you sugar for later calling `removeEventListener()`.

Does this semantic of rejecting the read() promises work well even for the piping case?

-- 
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/pull/1168#issuecomment-943694749