[whatwg] A suggestion, if postMessage becomes async

Jeff Walden jwalden+whatwg at MIT.EDU
Tue Apr 22 17:38:05 PDT 2008

Make the targetOrigin argument non-optional.  "*" would mean "don't care" while anything else would specify an origin (or result in a syntax error).  If this is done,  it's no longer possible to have time-of-check/time-of-use issues (in the async case) without the web developer explicitly choosing to do so.  This change shouldn't be any more than 5-10 lines, and fixing existing testcases to adjust for this change is straightforward.


P.S. -- The work needed to make the change I note above is substantially less than the work needed for an async postMessage.  I did a trial implementation+test fixup for async postMessage in <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=430251>.  I found my implementation added roughly 40 more lines of code -- not great but not too bad.  Far more substantially, adjusting tests to the change, particularly tests looking to perform numerous steps in a particular sequence, was slow and painful.  My conclusions are that back-and-forth communication with async postMessage is substantially harder than it is with sync postMessage, while async postMessage is moderately more difficult to implement than sync postMessage.

More information about the whatwg mailing list