On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 6:05 PM, David Levin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 5:05 PM, Jonas Sicking <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:07 PM, David Levin <[email protected]> wrote: >> > It seems like this mechanism would deadlock a worker if two workers send >> > each other a synchronous message. >> >> Indeed. We can only allow child workers to block on parent workers. >> Never the other way around. > > So the api would have to know who is listening to the other end of the port > and throw if it isn't a parent?
I'm not convinced that we can do this with ports in a sane manner. Only on dedicated workers. There you always know who is listening on the other end. I.e. only on the DedicatedWorkerGlobalScope/Worker interfaces. / Jonas
