I do suspect most of these will end up answered in the next meeting's notes, though. Hopefully, they do. So on that note, I'll let this sit for a bit longer (and probably re-ask then if it ends up not addressed). -----
Isiah Meadows [email protected] On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Isiah Meadows <[email protected]> wrote: > Okay...I may have misremembered the general reason (I thought I saw > perf concerns stated somewhere, but I can't remember precisely where), > but I've yet to see anything significant in the open about why they > were so against it. That's why I'm asking what drove them against it. > ----- > > Isiah Meadows > [email protected] > > > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Domenic Denicola <[email protected]> wrote: >> Why do you say "regarding performance"? That seems made up with no evidence. >> >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Isiah Meadows <[email protected]> >> Sent: Jan 5, 2017 20:09 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Cancel Token proposal withdrawl >> >> The [latest proposal][1] has been withdrawn due to [Google >> resistance][2] regarding performance. What concerns did they have, and >> with what parts? It's hard to figure out what the problem is and come >> up with ideas when it's all smoke and mirrors. And yes, I've tried >> searching for any traces of an answer, but I've found pretty much >> none, using multiple search engines. >> >> Please, could I get some sort of idea what is actually wrong with the >> proposal, what's driving them to be so strongly against it? :-( >> >> [1]: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-cancelable-promises >> [2]: >> https://github.com/tc39/proposal-cancelable-promises/issues/70#issuecomment-267414933 >> >> ----- >> >> Isiah Meadows >> [email protected] >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
