W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > May 2014

Re: [whatwg] Proposal: navigator.cores

From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
Date: Sun, 4 May 2014 06:49:42 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJE5ia8nac11YQaPTfVBbEF1Y5irCPgYqhA+zu8Fnx-y8qaSMA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tobie Langel <tobie.langel@gmail.com>
Cc: whatwg <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>, Eli Grey <me@eligrey.com>, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 12:13 AM, Tobie Langel <tobie.langel@gmail.com>wrote:

> On May 4, 2014, at 7:45, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 10:32 PM, Eli Grey <me@eligrey.com> wrote:
> >
> >> The proposal specifically states using logical cores, which handles
> >> all of the CPUs you mentioned properly.
> >>
> >> Intel CPUs with hyperthreading enabled report logical cores as double
> >> the hardware cores. Depending on the version and configuration of the
> >> Samsung Exynos Octa big.LITTLE CPUs, you will get either 4 logical
> >> cores (only one cluster can run at a time) or 8 logical cores
> >> (big.LITTLE MP, available in Exynos 5420 or later only).
> >>
> >
> > Great!
> > Make sure this is captured when it is put in a specification.
> > Otherwise the subtlety between an actual and a logical core might get
> lost.
>
> Shouldn't this also be captured in the API's name?
>

Maybe navigator.hardwareConcurrency as a nod to the C++11 name?

Adam
Received on Sunday, 4 May 2014 13:50:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 17:00:20 UTC