Egad.... I never realized that I had that typo. What I *MEANT* to say was that it appears to be impossible for different threads to use the *same* isiolate at the same time... freudian slip, I guess. Indeed, you've confirmed what I was suspecting.
In my case, a typed array won't do the trick, since I need to store arbitrary javascript types, not just one particular type of data... and as you have speculated, cloning the data will be costly. On Tuesday, October 14, 2014 12:22:47 AM UTC-7, Sven Panne wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 2:53 AM, Mark Tarrabain <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> [...] It appears to be impossible for different threads to use different >> isolates at the same time, >> > > That't not correct: 10 different threads could happily each use a > different Isolate at the same time, that's how web workers work. What does > not work: 2 threads use the same Isolate at the same time. In the latter > case you have to use locks, which essentially removes the "at the same > time" part. :-) > > >> and it appears to be impossible for different isolates to share data in >> any way without writing an inteface to convert between v8 objects and C++, >> [...] >> > > If you look at web workers, there are actually 2 ways: Either clone the > stuff you want to pass to another web worker (could be costly) or transfer > the ownership of a typed array (might not fit to what you're trying to > achieve, but it depends). But this is not real sharing in the sense of > shared memory: JavaScript doesn't have the notions of threading or a memory > model (yet). > -- -- v8-users mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-users --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "v8-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
