- From: Darin Fisher <darin@chromium.org>
- Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 11:21:39 -0800
For reference, reading document.cookie has measurable performance cost in Chromium since the cookie jar lives in a process separate from the process running JavaScript. We could have minimized this cost by caching the cookies locally, but then there are cache coherency issues. I think the cookie APIs should have been asynchronous from the start. Whenever an API is backed by I/O, asynchronous should be the rule. -Darin On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:11 AM, Nicholas Zakas <nzakas at yahoo-inc.com>wrote: > I like the idea of creating an easier way to deal with cookies (which is > why I wrote the YUI Cookie utility way back when). The thing that seems to > be missing in your proposed API is what I consider to be the most common use > case: retrieving the value of a single cookie. There's not many times when I > need to get every single cookie that's available on the page, but there are > plenty of times when I want to check the value of a single cookie. Using > your API, getting the value of a single cookie with a known name becomes: > > document.getCookies(function(cookies) { > for (var i=0; i < cookies.length; ++i){ > if(cookies[i].name == "my_cookie_name"){ > doSomething(cookies[i]); > } > } > }); > > That seems like a lot of work just to retrieve a single cookie value. > > I'm also less-than-thrilled with this being asynchronous, as I think the > use cases for cookies are vastly differently than those for databases and > web storage. The world is already parsing cookies synchronously right now, > it doesn't seem like asynchronicity buys much benefit, it just introduces an > additional level of indirection. > > -Nicholas > > ______________________________________________ > Commander Lock: "Damnit Morpheus, not everyone believes what you believe!" > Morpheus: "My beliefs do not require them to." > > -----Original Message----- > From: whatwg-bounces at lists.whatwg.org [mailto: > whatwg-bounces at lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of Adam Barth > Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:47 AM > To: Darin Fisher > Cc: whatwg > Subject: Re: [whatwg] HTML Cookie API > > Done. > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Darin Fisher <darin at chromium.org> wrote: > > An explicit deleteCookie method might also be nice. > > -Darin > > > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 8:56 PM, Adam Barth <w3c at adambarth.com> wrote: > >> > >> The document.cookie API is kind of terrible. Web developers shouldn't > >> have to parse a cookie-string or prepare a properly formated > >> set-cookie-string. Here's a proposal for an HTML cookie API that > >> isn't as terrible: > >> > >> > >> > https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AZpchfQ5mBrEZGQ0cDh3YzRfMTRmdHFma21kMg&hl=en > >> > >> I'd like to propose we include this API in a future version of HTML. > >> As always, feedback welcome. > >> > >> Adam > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20100224/2168597e/attachment-0001.htm>
Received on Wednesday, 24 February 2010 11:21:39 UTC