Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #28924

Re: Concurrency folded out?

Newsgroups comp.lang.javascript
Date 2015-11-24 13:15 -0800
References <e4834b6d-6881-46cd-8c2b-739f3fa6dd11@googlegroups.com> <faacbd18-19a2-4414-b76b-a7f5a5ce4db9@googlegroups.com> <a490147e-d786-474f-a8c7-6454d624a173@googlegroups.com> <3e209cb8-9ce6-44f4-95d1-2731a73589d6@googlegroups.com> <83b2c189-cfac-41e4-987e-765b4f274982@googlegroups.com>
Message-ID <fe9e67fa-1b0a-4e17-89c0-d5f2b62c208f@googlegroups.com> (permalink)
Subject Re: Concurrency folded out?
From Øyvind Teig <oyvind.teig@teigfam.net>

Show all headers | View raw

An update on my own comment. 

The part about Web workers being explicitly parallel I have found no reference to. However, they talk about "background" processing in the context of not blocking the main JavaScript thread. 

How this may be implemented I think is covered here: 

"Some algorithms run in parallel; this means that the algorithm's subsequent steps are to be run, one after another, at the same time as other logic in the specification (e.g. at the same time as the event loop). This specification does not define the precise mechanism by which this is achieved, be it time-sharing cooperative multitasking, fibers, threads, processes, using different hyperthreads, cores, CPUs, machines, etc. By contrast, an operation that is to run immediately must interrupt the currently running task, run itself, and then resume the previously running task." [1]

I then assume that they talk about Web workers' "backgroundness" and not something else.

[1] From https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/infrastructure.html#in-parallel, referenced from https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/workers.html#handler-worker-onmessage

Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Concurrency folded out? Øyvind Teig <oyvind.teig@gmail.com> - 2015-11-18 00:48 -0800
  Re: Concurrency folded out? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2015-11-19 17:13 -0800
    Re: Concurrency folded out? Øyvind Teig <oyvind.teig@gmail.com> - 2015-11-20 04:47 -0800
      Re: Concurrency folded out? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2015-11-21 10:41 -0800
        Re: Concurrency folded out? Øyvind Teig <oyvind.teig@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 13:47 -0800
          Re: Concurrency folded out? Øyvind Teig <oyvind.teig@teigfam.net> - 2015-11-24 13:15 -0800
          Re: Concurrency folded out? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2015-12-01 18:18 -0800
  Re: Concurrency folded out? Øyvind Teig <oyvind.teig@teigfam.net> - 2015-12-04 11:36 -0800
    Re: Concurrency folded out? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2015-12-05 10:25 -0800
  Re: Concurrency folded out? Øyvind Teig <oyvind.teig@teigfam.net> - 2015-12-08 00:04 -0800
    Re: Concurrency folded out? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2015-12-08 16:04 -0800

csiph-web