- From: Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 20:20:52 -0400
- To: David Bruant <bruant.d@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 7:52 PM, David Bruant <bruant.d@gmail.com> wrote: > Le 12/08/2014 00:40, Glenn Maynard a écrit : > > On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 9:12 AM, David Bruant <bruant.d@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> 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. > > > Syntax sugar around async is not a replacement for synchronous APIs. > > I have yet to find a use case for hand-written code that requires sync APIs > and cannot be achieved with async programming. > Asynch complicates diagramming and modelling because you need a state machine instead of a simple ladder diagram. One of the reasons cited for the heartbleed failure was standards imposed complexity. Forcing async when sync will suffice surely complicates some programs. I also find it easier to audit the latter. Jeff
Received on Tuesday, 12 August 2014 00:21:19 UTC