W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > April 2009

[whatwg] Worker feedback

From: Michael Nordman <michaeln@google.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2009 19:28:21 -0700
Message-ID: <fa2eab050904061928v56ea444ua877fff657c473c4@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 7:17 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert at ocallahan.org>wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 5:04 AM, Michael Nordman <michaeln at google.com>wrote:
>
>> There are additional constraints that haven't been mentioned yet...
>> Plugins.
>>
>> The current model for plugins is that they execute in a single-threaded
>> world. Chrome maintains that model by hosting each plugin in its own process
>> and RPC'ing method invocations back and forth between calling pages and the
>> plugin instances. All plugin instances (of a given plugin) reside on the
>> same thread.
>>
>
> Why can't instances of a plugin in different browser contexts be hosted in
> separate processes?


It would be expensive, and i think has this would have some correctness
issues too depending on the plugin. Some plugins depend on instances knowing
about each other and interoperating with each other out of band of DOM based
means doing so.


>
>
> 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/20090406/c95ee969/attachment.htm>
Received on Monday, 6 April 2009 19:28:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:11 UTC