Re: Transferable and structured clones, was: Re: [FileAPI] Deterministic release of Blob proposal from Arun Ranganathan on 2012-03-06 (public-webapps@w3.org from January to March 2012)

From: Arun Ranganathan <aranganathan@mozilla.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 13:31:30 -0800 (PST)
To: Kenneth Russell <kbr@google.com>
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org, Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>, Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>, Feras Moussa <ferasm@microsoft.com>, Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>, Greg Billock <gbillock@google.com>
Message-ID: <303269388.6082315.1331069490764.JavaMail.root@zimbra1.shared.sjc1.mozilla.com>

Ken,

> I'm not sure that adding close() to Transferable is a good idea. Not
> all Transferable types may want to support that explicit operation.
> What about adding close() to Blob, and having the neutering operation
> on Blob be defined to call close() on it?


Specifically, you think this is not something ArrayBuffer should inherit?  If it's also a bad idea for MessagePort, then those are really our only two use cases of Transferable right now.  I'm happy to create something like a close() on Blob.

-- A*

Received on Tuesday, 6 March 2012 21:31:58 UTC