- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 17:42:47 -0800
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Michael Nordman <michaeln at google.com> wrote: >> Allowing cookie to be set would unfortunately create a synchronous >> communication channel between the worker and the main window. This is >> something that we need to avoid to prevent users from having to deal >> with locking and other thread related issues. > > Hmmm... the cookie setting API could be async in workers. Or you could just use postMessage() and ask the main thread to do it? What is the use case for reading/writing cookies though? Could use use localStorage instead (once we figure out a different API for it that doesn't have the shared-state problem that the current API has) Even just synchronous read access has race-condition problems. For example the following script: if (docCookies == "hello") { doStuff(); } else { log("cookies certainly aren't 'hello', they are: " + docCookies); } could result in "cookies certainly aren't 'hello', they are: hello" being printed. / Jonas
Received on Thursday, 5 March 2009 17:42:47 UTC