Re: Shared workers - use .source instead of .ports[0] ?

• From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
• Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 10:52:43 -0700
• To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
• Cc: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, Jarred Nicholls <jarred@webkit.org>, Andrew Wilson <atwilson@google.com>, David Levin <levin@google.com>, Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>, public-webapps@w3.org
• Message-ID: <CA+c2ei9_qcXJ-p9GW+VOhM+aFarJcgWD=4gyOCHqTLfvSV7kdQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
>
> I'm fine with making changes here. The following proposals seem to make
> the most sense, though I'm sure others could work too:
>
>  1. Leave it as is.
>
>  2. Make the .source attribute be of type (MessagePort or WindowProxy)?
>    and add the port to .source, also leaving it in .ports[0].
>
>  3. Make the .source attribute be of type (MessagePort or WindowProxy)?
>    and add the port to .source, making .ports null.
>
>  4. Set the .data attribute to the port, leaving it also in .ports[0].
>
>  5. Set the .data attribute to the port, making .ports null.
>
>  6. Use a new event object instead of MessageEvent.
>
> For back-compat, 1, 2, or 4 seem best.
>
> For similarity with posting things to other windows, 2 or 3 seem best.
> However, I think the similarity is a bit shallow in practice.
>
> For similarity with how messages are handled elsewhere in Workers and when
> using MessagePorts in general, 1 and 4 seem best.
>
> For cleanliness of code, any of 2-6 seem best.
>
> For consistency acros codebases on the Web, 1, 3, 5, or 6 seem best.
>
> If you count each of these considerations as being of equal importance,
> then options 1, 2, 3, and 4 all come out equally good.
>
> Right now the only actual implementation argues for 1, I believe.
>
> I think if I were designing the API from the ground up today I would do
> either 3 or 6. I think with back-compat concerns I would probably
> compromise by going for 2.
>
> Best way to convince me is to ship what you want. :-)

Shared workers is on our radar, but I don't have an ETA for when we'll
ship it. I suspect we'll go with 2 or 3 once we do ship.

/ Jonas

Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2012 17:53:46 UTC