W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2018

Re: web Worker API suggestion

From: Reilly Grant <reillyg@chromium.org>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 13:17:48 -0700
Message-ID: <CAEmk=MamBKdyvwnrbkbe1Lv5cGT6U9oiqCG-yHtt3rzML34pRg@mail.gmail.com>
To: info@andrevenancio.com
Cc: Patrick.Kettner@microsoft.com, public-webapps@w3.org
At BlinkOn 9 there was discussion of how ergonomics of the Worker API could
be improved in ways similar to what you suggest. Video of that session is
here
<https://drive.google.com/file/d/18V0baK57sAUFtD6uO9neLtZY8pR-Fzvn/view>.
Reilly Grant | Software Engineer | reillyg@chromium.org | Google Chrome
<https://www.google.com/chrome>


On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:21 AM Andre Venancio <info@andrevenancio.com>
wrote:

> Hi Patrick.
> Been having a look at that option too, however a linter wouldnt easily
> parse that in order to validate my javascript.. I do understand your point,
> however makes me feel dirty having to include a task for copying static
> file around from my SRC to my DIST folders. would be easier if there was a
> way of accessing another memory thread without having to handle this
> external file requirement.
>
>
>
> On Sun, 13 May 2018 at 21:07 Patrick Kettner <
> Patrick.Kettner@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey Andre!
>> The issue with this is that it would not be obvious that you are unable
>> to pass objects from the current scope into the worker (which would break
>> the entire purpose of having a fast codepath in another thread). You
>> *can* construct one from a string, however. You just need to wrap it up
>> like a file
>> <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/10343913/how-to-create-a-web-worker-from-a-string>
>>
>> cheers
>>
>> patrick
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Andre Venancio <info@andrevenancio.com>
>> *Sent:* Friday, May 11, 2018 9:25 AM
>> *To:* public-webapps@w3.org
>> *Subject:* web Worker API suggestion
>>
>> Hi,
>> Not sure this is the best email to contact you guys regarding an API
>> suggestion, but here it goes:
>>
>>
>> I've been thinking about this for a while now, and I think it would be
>> beneficial to update the Worker api to allow you to pass a IIFI function
>> instead of a external file?
>>
>> From: current Worker API:
>>
>> const worker = new Worker('lame.js');
>> worker.onmessage = (e) => {
>> console.log(e);
>> };
>>
>> // lame.js
>> this.addEventListener('message', (e) => {
>> this.postMessage({ message: 'hello back' });
>> });
>>
>>
>> to
>>
>> const worker = new Worker(() => {
>> this.addEventListener('message', (e) => {
>> this.postMessage({ message: 'hello back' });
>> });
>> });
>> worker.onmessage = (e) => {
>> console.log(e);
>> };
>>
>>
>> Wouldn't this be better?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Andre
>>
>
Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2018 20:18:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:15:14 UTC