Re: [chromium-html5] LocalStorage inside Worker

On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Keean Schupke <keean@fry-it.com> wrote:
>>> would:
>>> withNamedStorage('x', function(store) {...});
>>> make more sense from a naming point of view?
>>
>> I have a different association for 'with', especially in context of
>> JavaScript, so I prefer 'get'. But others feel free to express an
>> opinion.
>
> In the context of other languages with similar constructs (request a
> resource which is available within the body of the construct), the
> "with[resource]" naming scheme is pretty common and well-known.  I
> personally like it.

Even for asynchronous callbacks? Can you give any examples?

/ Jonas