Re: Request for feedback: Streams API

On 12/04/2013 06:27 PM, Feras Moussa wrote:
> The editors of the Streams API have reached a milestone where we feel many of the major issues that have been identified thus far are now resolved and
> incorporated in the editors draft.
>
> The editors draft [1] has been heavily updated and reviewed the past few weeks to address all concerns raised, including:
> 1. Separation into two distinct types -ReadableByteStream and WritableByteStream
> 2. Explicit support for back pressure management
> 3. Improvements to help with pipe( ) and flow-control management
> 4. Updated spec text and diagrams for further clarifications
>
> There are still a set of bugs being tracked in bugzilla. We would like others to please review the updated proposal, and provide any feedback they may
> have (or file bugs).
>
> Thanks.
> -Feras
>
>
> [1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/streams-api/raw-file/tip/Overview.htm


So per https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24054
it is not clear to me why the API is heavily Promise based.
Event listeners tend to work better with stream like APIs.


(The fact the Promises are hip atm is not a reason to use them for everything ;) )

-Olli

Received on Monday, 16 December 2013 12:22:13 UTC