I don't mean to pick on workers specifically. We have lots of bugs in the bindings where we attach the __proto__ property of new objects to the wrong prototype chain. My specific concern is that we should fix these bugs. :)
Adam On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Drew Wilson<atwil...@google.com> wrote: > BTW, Adam - can you elaborate your specific concerns? > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Drew Wilson <atwil...@google.com> wrote: >> >> Not sure. There's language in the WebIDL spec around prototype objects of >> interface objects, but I'm not sure how window.Worker.prototype is intended >> to relate to >> new Worker().prototype (if at all), based on my 10 minutes of scanning specs. >> -atw >> >> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Adam Barth <aba...@webkit.org> wrote: >>> >>> 2009/6/23 Drew Wilson <atwil...@google.com>: >>> > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Adam Barth <aba...@webkit.org> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> > I am not even sure all of these should have the same behavior, >>> >> > however. For instance, as I read the Web Workers spec, the lexical >>> >> > global >>> >> > object may be correct thing to use for the Worker constructor. >>> >> >>> >> I looked at the spec briefly. What leads you to think that? It's >>> >> probably a bug in the spec. >>> > >>> > Section 4.5 of the web workers spec reads: >>> >> >>> >> Given a script's global scope o when creating or obtaining a worker, >>> >> the list of relevant Document objects to add depends on the type of o. >>> >> If o >>> >> is a WorkerGlobalScope object (i.e. if we are creating a nested worker), >>> >> then the relevant Documents are the Documents that are in o's own list of >>> >> the worker's Documents. Otherwise, o is a Window object, and the relevant >>> >> Document is just the Document that is the active document of the Window >>> >> object o. >>> > >>> > So it seems to imply that parent document for a worker is derived from >>> > the currently executing script's global scope. I'll ping IanH about this - >>> > it may not be what he intended. >>> >>> There's another question, which is where does the prototype chain of >>> the JS object you get out of the worker constructor point? It might >>> not have anything to do with this Document calculation. >>> >>> Adam >> > > _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev