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

Re: =[xhr]

From: David Rajchenbach-Teller <dteller@mozilla.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 17:39:55 +0200
Message-ID: <5407364B.6010106@mozilla.com>
To: Brendan Eich <brendan@secure.meer.net>
CC: public-webapps@w3.org
Indeed, this will be easier to compile, read and debug than CPS but
likely slower and more memory-expensive.

Note that I am not involved in any DOM-related plans, just answering
questions from the original poster that had remained unanswered, based
on my personal experience rewriting synchronous code to make it
asynchronous and non-blocking.

Best regards,
 David

On 03/09/14 17:34, Brendan Eich wrote:
> All call sites, every last Java method => JS function call? That means
> every single function becomes a generate, all functions use yield and so
> become generator functions, all calls construct a generator which must
> have .next() called to get it started. The performance is not going to
> be tolerable.
> 
> This vague suggestion has come  up with Emscripten re: sync APIs for
> workers, and it's a bogus hand-wave. Please don't suggest it as a
> solution and then make definite plans to reject sync APIs in workers or
> schedule removal of XHR's async=false mode on a date certain!
> 
> /be
> 
> 
> 


-- 
David Rajchenbach-Teller, PhD
 Performance Team, Mozilla


Received on Wednesday, 3 September 2014 15:40:32 UTC

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