W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2014

Re: Blocking message passing for Workers

From: David Bruant <bruant.d@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2014 16:12:49 +0200
Message-ID: <53E62C61.9060700@gmail.com>
To: adelespinasse@gmail.com, Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>
CC: public-webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
Le 09/08/2014 15:51, Alan deLespinasse a écrit :
> Thanks. Apparently I did a lousy job of searching for previous 
> discussions.
>
> I just found this later, longer thread:
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/0965.html
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012JanMar/0678.html
> (same thread, different year, so they're not linked)
>
> Has anything changed since that thread? It seems like the discussion 
> stalled in early 2012. But I'm glad to find that other people want the 
> same thing.
This topic is on people minds [1]. My understanding of where we're at is 
that "ECMAScript 7" will bring syntax (async/await keywords [2]) that 
looks like sync syntax, but acts asynchronously. This should eliminate 
the need for web devs for blocking message passing primitives for workers.

There is still a case for blocking primitives for projects that compile 
from other languages (C, C++, Python, Java, C#, etc.) to JS [3].

I personally hope it won't happen as it would be a step backwards. 
Blocking communication (cross-thread/process/computer) was a mistake. We 
need a culture shift. The browser and Node.js are a step in the right 
direction (they did not initiate it, but helped popularize it).

David

[1] https://twitter.com/briankardell/status/497843660680351744
[2] https://github.com/lukehoban/ecmascript-asyncawait#example
[3] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=783190#c26
Received on Saturday, 9 August 2014 14:13:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:14:26 UTC