- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 13:47:00 -0700
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Jeremy Orlow <jorlow at google.com> wrote: > What is the need for localStorage access within workers? ?Technically if > someone really needed to access it, they could always have a function in the > web page for accessing it and then use postMessage. ?In other words, they > could build their own ad-hoc async API pretty easily. ?Another alternative > is to just build an async API into the spec (and remove?synchronous?access > to localStorage). > Thoughts? I do think it would be great if workers had access to some type of structured storage. However I agree that the fact that both the main thread and workers have synchronous access to the same storage is not acceptable since that means that we're violating the shared-nothing-message-passing design that makes workers not have to deal with locks and other traditional multithread hazards. / Jonas
Received on Friday, 20 March 2009 13:47:00 UTC