| 17:09 | <shu> | i want to repeat a point i made at the last plenary: i wouldn't interpret "other web platforms could be polyfilled" as motivation for building AsyncContext |
| 17:10 | <shu> | independently i think there's already a lot of positive signal of developer enthusiasm |
| 17:28 | <Kris Kowal> | independently i think there's already a lot of positive signal of developer enthusiasm |
| 19:13 | <shu> | yall out here being curmudgeonly about well-behaved dynamic scope while PHP has been thriving for 20 years on $$var |
| 19:33 | <Kris Kowal> | bash doesn’t even have gensyms, but bash isn’t interesting. |
| 19:33 | <Kris Kowal> | …or does it, muhahahah |
| 19:42 | <littledan> | i want to repeat a point i made at the last plenary: i wouldn't interpret "other web platforms could be polyfilled" as motivation for building |
| 19:43 | <littledan> | (The need for fancier scheduling than postTask provides has been part of its limited uptake, I think) |
| 19:46 | <shu> | does it? |
| 20:40 | <littledan> | Well, yeah, priority and task attribution are parallel, unrelated variables |
| 20:41 | <littledan> | Blink implements the multiplexing there |
| 20:41 | <shu> | yes, but does it follow from that that we need a user-programmable multiplexing primitive? |
| 20:42 | <littledan> | Well, OK it doesn’t prove that |
| 20:43 | <littledan> | The first sentence was a weaker claim, that the web platform itself needs multiple variables |
| 20:43 | <shu> | anyway i'm already convinced of developer demand |
| 20:43 | <shu> | i just disagree with the narrower claim that the web APIs we're working on are also evidence of that demand |
| 20:44 | <littledan> | Something something extensible web manifesto? Anyway sounds like I don’t need to make that claim in the first place. |
| 20:46 | <littledan> | My hope is that we will come to understand that AsyncContext can back task attribution and yield priority inheritance, but I think we need to get further in the prototype implementation to prove this out |
| 20:46 | <shu> | yeah something something extensible web manifesto is the right default |
| 20:46 | <shu> | but there are compelling counterexamples, like text shaping |
| 20:46 | <shu> | we've learned you don't actually want to expose primitives for people to build shitty text shapers |
| 20:46 | <shu> | you just want to expose text shaping |
| 20:46 | <shu> | this space is kinda new to me so i don't actually know yet |
| 20:47 | <shu> | maybe it should be extensible |
| 20:47 | <littledan> | PSA: lobby your local browser vendor to support https://github.com/WICG/canvas-formatted-text |
| 20:48 | <littledan> | Anyway I agree with your example and this is why Intl.Segmenter doesn’t support line breaks |
| 20:53 | <bakkot> | what if instead the text shaper calls a wasm program embedded in the font to do the text shaping https://github.com/harfbuzz/harfbuzz/blob/main/docs/wasm-shaper.md |
| 20:55 | <shu> | i mean that's probably fine |