- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 10:13:03 -0700
- To: Mounir Lamouri <mounir@lamouri.fr>
- Cc: "www-dom@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Mounir Lamouri <mounir@lamouri.fr> wrote: > On 12/04/13 01:05, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> I propose that we change it so that, if at least one progress update >> has already been made and the future isn't yet resolved, the progress >> callback is immediately (next tick) called with the most recent >> progress value. That way the progress updates also act kinda like >> futures in general, which is nice. > > I guess it would be good to have the callback being called synchronously > in that case maybe (assuming ProgressFuture specification re-uses the > synchronous flag). I don't think it should run synch. It's important, to keep reasoning about Futures sane, that everything run consistently async. > Also, I think we should call .progress() such as .then() when the > ProgressFuture is done. Hmm, maybe. I'm not sure. ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 18 April 2013 17:13:52 UTC