Re: [whatwg/streams] Add support for ReadableStream "transfer" type (PR #1271)

> OK, I'll start doing it. Rethinking a bit, I wonder the following:
> 
> * Would `type:'serialize'` be a better name than `type:'transfer'` (which conflicts a bit with transform streams, transferable streams and we sometimes serialize and not transfer chunks)?

This maybe needs a bit more bikeshedding. Another alternative I can think of is `type: 'owning'`.

> * Is the syntactic sugar for transferable objects (`enqueue(videoFrame)` instead of `enqueue(videoFrame, [videoFrame])`) a good idea now that we have the additional `transfer` parameter?

I really like the syntactic sugar personally, and I think being a different `type` of stream is a good enough excuse to use it. I'd like to get other people's input on this because there may be footguns I'm overlooking.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/streams/pull/1271#issuecomment-1506446352
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <whatwg/streams/pull/1271/c1506446352@github.com>