On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 7:52 PM, David Bruant <bruan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Le 12/08/2014 00:40, Glenn Maynard a écrit :
>
> On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 9:12 AM, David Bruant <bruan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> This topic is on people minds [1]. My understanding of where we're at is
>> that "ECMAScript 7" will bring syntax (async/await keywords [2]) that looks
>> like sync syntax, but acts asynchronously. This should eliminate the need
>> for web devs for blocking message passing primitives for workers.
>
>
> Syntax sugar around async is not a replacement for synchronous APIs.
>
> I have yet to find a use case for hand-written code that requires sync APIs
> and cannot be achieved with async programming.
>
Asynch complicates diagramming and modelling because you need a state
machine instead of a simple ladder diagram.

One of the reasons cited for the heartbleed failure was standards
imposed complexity. Forcing  async when sync will suffice surely
complicates some programs.

I also find it easier to audit the latter.

Jeff

Reply via email to