On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 4:06 AM, Ian Hicksoni...@hixie.ch wrote:
Upon further consideration I've renamed getStorageUpdates() to
yieldForStorageUpdates().
If getStorageUpdates() actually returned how *many* updates there
were, it could be a vaguely useful name.
If the answer is 0, then my
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 2:24 AM, timeless timel...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 4:06 AM, Ian Hicksoni...@hixie.ch wrote:
Upon further consideration I've renamed getStorageUpdates() to
yieldForStorageUpdates().
If getStorageUpdates() actually returned how *many* updates there
Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 10:06 PM, Ian Hicksoni...@hixie.ch wrote:
Upon further consideration I've renamed getStorageUpdates() to
yieldForStorageUpdates().
I really liked Darin's (?) suggestion of allowStorageUpdates as that
seems to exactly describe the intended use
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
First of all, I was wondering why all user prompts are specified as
must release the storage mutex (
http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#user-prompts).
This is because otherwise, if the script has the storage mutex, the user
can't open any
