[whatwg] reply() extension to postMessage()
ian at hixie.ch
Sat Mar 1 20:09:08 PST 2008
On Sat, 1 Mar 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> > I updated the proposal recently (in response to similar feedback from
> > Adam or Collin) to say that when you pass an EndPoint through
> > postMessage(), what happens is that a clone EndPoint is made for
> > delivery on the other side, and the EndPoint you passed becomes
> > invalid.
> So why bother with having one side create two endpoints just to have one
> made invalid? It intoroduces two more objects (the pair and the second
> endpoint) that the caller basically will just throw away. Wouldn't it be
> better to have one side instead create just one endpoint (though I would
> call it a messagePipe instead) and then make the postMessage
> implementation create the other endpoint.
Because then you could only pass an endpoint across a pipe once. The idea
is to be able to send both ends across pipes many times.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg