And yes, I've been paying attention to safety. What I'm actually going to be using behind the scenes for the proposal is an event-driven system to coordinate thread access and having both atomic updates and synchronized calls by default, and this system will also work with the event loop as well, with a basic priority system in place.
I'm still working on it, and I plan to have a gist in tandem with this, so I don't have to have a long, detailed email to start. I just want to see something a little lighter than just cloning *everything* (zero copy preferable), and the ability to have high-level manipulation of shared data without requiring SharedArrayBuffers, a `malloc` reimplementation, and a boilerplatey abstraction on top of everything. ----- Isiah Meadows [email protected] On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 8:27 PM, Michael J. Ryan <[email protected]> wrote: > At the module level for a parallel import, etc would be a decent point to > support parallel execution... But checks would be needed to avoid migration > at boundaries... > > I'm not opposed to parallel execution... But changing the async spec to > allow unsafe threads is just a really bad idea... I have also seen many > bugs in .Net and Java code surrounding bugs and rather not see those types > of shared/static access in JS. > > Having an import worker/parallel with a clean interface could be good... > > > On Nov 2, 2016 1:28 PM, "Isiah Meadows" <[email protected]> wrote: > > I've been working on another idea for parallelism that also leverage > modules, but doesn't involve workers. It will enable read-only resource > sharing of direct object instances across threads, using realms, a built-in > concept of thread ownership, and atomicity for ensuring thread safety. It > also allows for blocking calls for individual atomic access. > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016, 16:00 Leo Dutra <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> We could think in a pool of workers with dynamic code execution or >> propose, in JS spec, points where multithreading is recommended. >> >> Anyway... looks like community is OK with the current state and that's >> more than enough. >> >> Good to see interest, anyways. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> es-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > > _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
