[whatwg] ArrayBuffer and the structured clone algorithm

[Jorge]

On 01/02/2011, at 11:19, Simon Pieters wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Feb 2011 07:47:26 +0100, Kenneth Russell <kbr at google.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 7 Jan 2011, David Flanagan wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> The structured clone algorithm currently allows ImageData and Blob
>>>> objects to be cloned but doesn't mention ArrayBuffer.  Is this
>>>> intentional?  I assume there are no security issues involved, since one
>>>> could copy the bytes of an ArrayBuffer into either a Blob or an
>>>> ImageData object in order to clone them.
>>> 
>>> It's intentional in that I'm waiting for ArrayBuffer to be more stable
>>> before I add it throughout the spec. (Same with CORS and the various
>>> places that might support cross-origin communication, e.g. Web Workers,
>>> Server-Sent Events, <img>+<canvas>, etc.)
>> 
>> There's been some preliminary discussion within the WebGL working
>> group (where ArrayBuffer / Typed Arrays originated) about using
>> ArrayBuffer with Web Workers in particular. There is a strong desire
>> to support handoff of an ArrayBuffer from the main thread to a worker
>> and vice versa; this would allow efficient producer/consumer queues to
>> be built without violating ECMAScript's shared-nothing semantics.
>> 
>> All of the parties involved are pretty busy getting WebGL 1.0 out the
>> door; once that happens, we aim to make one more revision to the Typed
>> Array spec to support (1) read-only arrays for more efficient XHRs and
>> (2) handoff of ArrayBuffers. Expect public discussions to start in
>> about six to eight weeks.
> 
> While you're discussing efficient handoff of ArrayBuffer, do you also keep in mind efficient handoff of other objects (e.g. ImageData) as discussed in this thread?: http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2011-January/029885.html
> 
> cheers
> -- 
> Simon Pieters
> Opera Software

Yes. Please. +1

Cheers,
-- 
Jorge.