W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: What changes to Web Messaging spec are proposed? [Was: Re: Using ArrayBuffer as payload for binary data to/from Web Workers]

From: Kenneth Russell <kbr@google.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:27:27 -0700
Message-ID: <BANLkTinucycyp_Dug9jTj9hxCdcS-RG-jQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Jun 2011, Kenneth Russell wrote:
>> Slightly larger issue. In the typed array spec, views like Float32Array
>> refer to an ArrayBuffer instance. It's desired to be able to transfer
>> multiple views of the same ArrayBuffer in the same postMessage call.
>> Currently, because each Transferable is transferred independently,
>> transferring the first view will cause the view and underlying
>> ArrayBuffer to be neutered, so upon encountering the second view, an
>> exception will be thrown since its ArrayBuffer was already transferred.
> The views shouldn't be Transferable. Only the buffer should be. The views
> should continue to have the behaviour you had described before, where they
> recurse to clone their buffer then just clone the view. Since the buffers
> would already be transferred (the transfering happens before the cloning),
> it'll all just work.

Thanks, I think I see how this is supposed to work now. I'll rewrite
the relevant sections of the typed array spec soon and ping you or
post again if it looks like there are any other issues.

Received on Friday, 24 June 2011 23:28:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:13:20 UTC