W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > March 2014

Re: Improvements suggestion for DataChannels

From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 15:13:24 +0100
Message-ID: <53148E04.6030005@alvestrand.no>
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
On 03/03/2014 02:06 PM, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 3 March 2014 04:18, Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com> wrote:
>> I still think that's strange API behavior.
> I don't see any strangeness here.  If I have a reference, then the
> object is not garbage collected.  If not, then not.
>
Do we currently close a datachannel if it's garbage collected (that is,
if the app loses all references to it)?
Or do we let it sit idle until the PC is garbage collected?

(section 5.4 of the spec seems to allow us to garbage collect it if
there are no handlers registered, but doesn't explicitly say that it
closes when garbage collected).

If we introduce a getter, people have a reasonable expectation that the
channel should stick around until closed, even if they have not bothered
to add event handlers to it yet.

-- 
Surveillance is pervasive. Go Dark.
Received on Monday, 3 March 2014 14:13:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:38 UTC