- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 20:18:21 -0800
Well, you'd probably want to support things like w.postMessage({ command: "do cool thing", data: myBlob }); / Jonas Aaron Boodman wrote: > If you support worker.sendMessage(<stuff>), where <stuff> is defined > by convenience to be: whatever you are allowed to send > JSON.stringify(), then you could expand this in the future to also > allow blobs w/o changing anything about JSON. > > - a > > On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 8:10 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas at sicking.cc> wrote: >> Indeed. Blobs is a great idea. We'll probably have to create further JSON >> extensions to support that. >> >> / Jonas >> >> Aaron Boodman wrote: >>> +1, because I think it will be useful to pass other things to workers >>> that JSON cannot represent (blobs) in the future. >>> >>> - a >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas at sicking.cc> wrote: >>>> Hi All, >>>> >>>> Ben just wrote up a patch to support JSON objects as well as primitive >>>> values (0, null, false, etc) to be passed to and from workers using >>>> postMessage. >>>> >>>> Wanted to see what the reactions to this was. Is it a good idea or not? >>>> >>>> I seem to recall this coming up in the past in the original feedback >>>> about >>>> what features people wanted. >>>> >>>> The technical details are as follows: >>>> Any of the following values are passed by value as-is: >>>> * strings >>>> * numbers >>>> * booleans >>>> * undefined >>>> * null >>>> >>>> Anything else is passed to JSON.stringify (defined by Ecmascript drafts >>>> here[1]). If calling JSON.stringify throws the same error will be thrown >>>> by >>>> the function. Otherwise the message event fired on the other 'side' will >>>> contain the result of JSON.parse. >>>> >>>> / Jonas >>>> >>
Received on Monday, 17 November 2008 20:18:21 UTC