On 20/03/2011, at 21:30, Dean Landolt wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Boris Zbarsky <[email protected]> wrote: > >> It's the one browser makers have all implemented. >> > The key word here is "browser makers". Maybe node's process.nextTick is a > footgun,
It isn't a footgun, it's a necessity for example for long-running tasks that shouldn't block the event loop. Either a nextTick() or a non-clamping setTimeout( f, 0 ); > but it's one you'll need if you want to roll your own scheduling, for > instance. Exactly. > Apparently there is real evidence that clamping in setTimeout is necessary > but that doesn't mean it makes sense as a language construct. It doesn't, so we're going to need a non-clamping alias. Perhaps an [ugly] setTimeout ( ƒ, -1 ) ? -- Jorge. _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
