| 00:56 | <domfarolino> | Domenic: yeah that’s a good call indeed |
| 08:05 | <annevk> | Domenic: why is the normal caching approach not good? |
| 10:06 | <Ms2ger> | In https://heycam.github.io/webidl/#legacy-platform-object-set , what's the "If O and Receiver are the same object, then:" check for? |
| 10:12 | <annevk> | I keep forgetting what Receiver is, sorry |
| 10:17 | <annevk> | Having read up on it, I'm not quite sure, but it seems easy enough to test with Reflect.set() or some such? |
| 10:18 | <annevk> | That is, to see if it's what implementations do |
| 14:36 | <Domenic> | MikeSmith: what do the w3c.json files do? I cargo-culted one at https://github.com/WICG/kv-storage/blob/master/w3c.json but am unclear why I did that |
| 14:37 | <Ms2ger> | annevk, shouldn't the "UTF-8 decode" algorithms return one of the Infra string types rather than a tream? |
| 14:37 | <Ms2ger> | stream |
| 14:38 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: https://github.com/whatwg/encoding/issues/128 handles some of that |
| 14:38 | <Domenic> | I feel like I had a large-ish issue about my confusion about how to use those algorithms |
| 14:39 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: in general I hope we can also say that Encoding stream and scalar value string autocast |
| 14:39 | <Domenic> | Like how most call sites seem to expect them to return a string but they return a stream |
| 14:39 | <Domenic> | Ah, there it is. https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/issues/661 |
| 14:39 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: since it mostly doesn't matter |
| 14:39 | <Domenic> | (My issue is not really the same thing, but is impacted.) |
| 14:40 | <annevk> | Generally we handle not-directly exposed streams in a rather hand-wavy way |
| 14:40 | <annevk> | And it's also not clear to me we want all the complexity of encoding_rs in standards, where we end up with synchronous and asynchronous algorithms and such |
| 14:41 | <Domenic> | I think ideally we'd confine the hand-waviness to some specific operations |
| 14:41 | <annevk> | I guess this is a long way of saying that I wouldn't mind improvements, if someone were to offer them |
| 14:42 | <Domenic> | It's really confusing that you can synchronously read from a fetch body by treating it as an Encoding Standard byte stream, but it might be asynchronously filled by JS code. |
| 14:42 | <Domenic> | I'm not sure how to improve things though, it's just too big. |
| 14:42 | <annevk> | Well, I'd expect that you'd wait for it to be done streaming in that case first though |
| 14:42 | <annevk> | Fetch has some primitives around waiting for things, but it's been a while |
| 14:43 | <Domenic> | I guess one improvement I suggest in my thread is to have versions of the Encoding Standard algorithms that operate only on static byte sequences / strings, and use those wherever we can. Then we can see what the problematic cases are, where we're actually operating on something that could change over time, and get a better idea of what we need to do there. |
| 14:44 | <Domenic> | There are probably less disruptive ways to accomplish that though. |
| 14:52 | <annevk> | I'd be happy to review patches, but it's not really a priority for me |
| 20:00 | <annevk> | Domenic: another look at https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/4214 would be great |
| 20:00 | <Domenic> | Oh, right... |
| 20:00 | <Domenic> | How does this help with BC groups? |
| 20:01 | <annevk> | Domenic: currently we tie event loops to browsing contexts at times |
| 20:01 | <annevk> | Domenic: doesn’t really make much sense |
| 20:01 | <Domenic> | I guess that is bad |
| 20:02 | <Domenic> | It seems like it might be possible to make the association be with agents without it being 1:1 |
| 20:03 | <Domenic> | I.e. allow many agents -> 1 event loop |
| 20:03 | <Domenic> | You mostly want to go agent -> event loop |
| 20:08 | <annevk> | But why though? Wouldn’t that also go against ECMAScript’s requirements on agents? |
| 20:09 | <Domenic> | A smaller delta from the existing spec would make me more comfortable. Let me check the ES requirements. |
| 20:10 | <Domenic> | No, ES requirements are not relevant because [[CanBlock]] is always false for window agents |
| 20:10 | <Domenic> | https://tc39.github.io/ecma262/#sec-forward-progress second para |
| 20:12 | <Domenic> | bbiab |
| 20:12 | <annevk> | Hmm so we’d have diff relationship reqs for diff agents? Hmm |
| 20:12 | <annevk> | User agents are pretty close to this being 1:1 too |
| 20:34 | <Domenic> | We already have different relationship requirements for different agents |
| 20:34 | <Domenic> | I thought UAs did pretty serious coalescing |
| 21:37 | <annevk> | Maybe same-site across BCGs, but that’s not observable so I’d rather have stronger guarantees in the spec |
| 21:37 | <annevk> | Also to ensure it does not become observable |
| 21:38 | <annevk> | I might be okay with allowing some coalescing though if impls want that |
| 22:18 | <MikeSmith> | Domenic: about the w3c.json file, it’s documented at https://w3c.github.io/w3c.json.html but I don’t know myself what tools if any actually do anything with it. It’s something Robin came up with a long time ago. |
| 22:20 | <Domenic> | I guess in the future I'll omit it until someone tells me what tools use it |