Re: Using ArrayBuffer as payload for binary data to/from Web Workers

On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Jonas Sicking <> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Kenneth Russell <> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Ian Hickson <> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 31 May 2011, Kenneth Russell wrote:
>>>> Jonas's suggestion of adding another argument to postMessage, and
>>>> Gregg's generalization to declare it as an array of objects to be
>>>> transferred rather than copied, sounds good.
>>> We could change make MessagePort and ArrayBuffer both inherit from a
>>> [NoInterfaceObject] empty interface, and then make the MessagePort[]
>>> argument of the various postMessage() methods instead take an array of
>>> this new interface, and then just have ArrayBuffer and MessagePort both
>>> define how to be cloned in this way.
>>> If people like this approach I can work with Kenneth on getting the
>>> wording right in the various specs.
>> This sounds good to me; in the interest of moving things forward, are
>> there any objections?
> No, this sounded good to the people here at mozilla that I talked with
> about this.

Apologies but I misunderstood something about this proposal and it no
longer seems desirable. I've followed up on the other (forked) thread.


Received on Thursday, 2 June 2011 17:23:29 UTC