On Sep 20, 2007 1:22 AM, Maciej Stachowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FWIW the async model would probably be easier to implement in the
> short run than worker threads, and we'd be hesitant to implement
> worker threads at all without a clear spec for which APIs should be
> available on worker threads. But in the long run I think having both
> is reasonable.
Agree.
That said, it will be even more common with databases to have multiple
asynchronous operations in a row than it is today with XHR. Doing this all
asynchronously will be incredibly painful.
I have done some thought on how to simplify the worker api, and I think it
could be as easy as:
var w = createWorker("foo.js");
w.sendMessage("messageName", jsonStyleObject);
w.addEventListener("messageName", function(e) {
// e.args is a jsonStyleObject that was sent from the worker.
}, false);
Inside the worker:
worker.addEventListener("messageName", function(e) {
// e.args is a jsonStyleObject that was sent from the worker.
}, false);
w.sendMessage("messageName", jsonStyleObject);
The main complication then will just be adding back access to the APIs you
need: XHR, database, cookies, timers, onerror, etc.
- a
