[whatwg] Worker feedback

Darin Fisher darin at google.com
Tue Apr 7 00:00:12 PDT 2009

On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 8:57 PM, timeless <timeless at gmail.com> wrote:

> FWIW, iirc multiple processes from IE dates to at least IE4
> The best url I can find on the subject atm is
> <http://aroundcny.com/technofile/texts/bit092098.html>.
> Michael Nordman <michaeln at google.com> wrote:
> > There are additional constraints that haven't been mentioned yet...
> Plugins.
> > The current model for plugins is that they execute in a single-threaded
> > world. Chrome maintains that model by hosting each plugin in its own
> process
> > and RPC'ing method invocations back and forth between calling pages and
> the
> > plugin instances. All plugin instances (of a given plugin) reside on the
> > same thread.
> Robert O'Callahan <robert at ocallahan.org> wrote:
> > Why can't instances of a plugin in different browser contexts be hosted
> > in separate processes?
> Michael Nordman <michaeln at google.com> wrote:
> > It would be expensive, and i think has this would have some correctness
> > issues too depending on the plugin. Some plugins depend on instances
> knowing
> > about each other and interoperating with each other out of band of DOM
> based
> > means doing so.
> Michael Nordman <michaeln at google.com> wrote:
> > And others probably assume they have exclusive access to mutable plugin
> > resources on disk.
> This seems unlikely. I can run Firefox, Safari, Chrome, IE, Opera, and
> others browsers at the same time, heck I can run multiple profiles of
> a couple of these (I can't find the option in the current version of
> Chrome, but I used it before).

chrome.exe --user-data-dir=c:\foo
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20090407/106207ed/attachment-0002.htm>

More information about the whatwg mailing list