[whatwg] Global Script proposal.

Mike Wilson mikewse at hotmail.com
Wed Aug 19 01:40:15 PDT 2009

Jeremy Orlow wrote:

Btw, I thought I'd just point out that the proposal mentions this case:
"From the proposal text: "All pages connected to the same Global Script
should run on the same thread, in the same process.  Since this is not
always technically possible, it should be legal (and not break the
applications) for there to be duplicate global script contexts within a UA".
I'm glad this came up, however, since now it's more clear why such language
is necessary. 

Ah, right I misread that part. I interpreted the second half of it (after
"technically possible") as other threading models were possible. Now, as I
understand it, two pages sharing a GlobalScript MUST share a single thread,
or otherwise MUST use a different/duplicate GlobalScript instance. 

On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Mike Wilson <mikewse at hotmail.com> wrote:

With this stated, I'd like to throw out a question on what do you want the
most - max performance in 100% of cases, but redundant GlobalScript
contexts, or max performance in most cases and singular GlobalScript

I don't think any UA is realistically going to do this for v1.  But sure,
the door should be left open for in the future.  (The initial proposal
allows for both, btw.)

That's exactly my point, the door should be open for these kind of
improvements. But to allow both, I think the proposal text has to be
adjusted somewhat, as interpretations (like mine) will otherwise risk
assuming that different threads/processes MUST imply having different
GlobalScript context instances.
Best regards
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20090819/32a6f9f9/attachment-0002.htm>

More information about the whatwg mailing list