Re: [whatwg/streams] Proposal: `ReadableStream.withSafeResolvers()` (Issue #1359)

juner left a comment (whatwg/streams#1359)

@MattiasBuelens 

😄 Fair point — grouping them back into a controller is certainly the obvious shape, and I agree that if this functionality exists, `ReadableStreamDefaultController` is a natural place for it.

I think there may be two slightly different questions here, though:

1. *How do you obtain a controller?*  
   (`withController()`, `withResolvers()`, or the existing constructor + underlying source hooks)

2. *What observable state does a controller expose once you have it?*  
   (e.g. `closed`, `state`, etc.)

My original motivation was mostly about (2): giving producers an explicit, synchronous way to observe completion, so they can deliberately avoid late enqueues without relying on try/catch, while still preserving the existing fail-fast semantics and backpressure behavior.

Exposing something like `controller.closed` or a small `controller.state` enum would address that concern just as well, and arguably more cleanly, than hanging it off a separate “resolvers” object. That also avoids introducing a new conceptual surface if the information naturally belongs to the controller anyway.

So yes — if the direction is to add observable completion state, putting it on `ReadableStreamDefaultController` itself seems like a very reasonable place to explore.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/streams/issues/1359#issuecomment-3822766025
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <whatwg/streams/issues/1359/3822766025@github.com>