W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > November 2008

[whatwg] Workers and queue of events

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 22:55:44 +1300
Message-ID: <11e306600811190155g7b7c8de2t87d38ee4ecc203a1@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 7:43 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas at sicking.cc> wrote:

> And if it becomes a problem we might in a future version be able to add
> something like a 'messagepostfailed' event that is fired on the sending port
> in case a message failed to reach its target for one reason or another.
>

I don't think that would be useful. What if the message reaches the target
but the target dies while the message is queued? Or it dies after executing
the first JS statement in the message handler?

The only way to be sure that a message has been processed to receive a
response from the target saying so.

If I was implementing workers in their own processes, I'd be tempted to make
abnormal termination of the worker fatal to any Web page that was aware of
the existence of the worker. The principle of "if you can't follow the spec,
destroy the evidence so no-one can prove it".

Rob
-- 
"He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are
healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his
own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." [Isaiah
53:5-6]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20081119/3368fbe9/attachment.htm>
Received on Wednesday, 19 November 2008 01:55:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:07 UTC