You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This would look like further data- attributes on a script tag that would build a set of entry points for workers. Every worker including the main thread would be able to "spawn" any worker as effectively a child process. The interface for the worker needs to be identical between use in Node.js, in the browser during development, in the browser with a bundle. Each worker would produce a separate bundle and be cross-referenced by relative URL so they can execute each other.
Punting ideas for shared common bundles and service workers as out of scope for minimum viable workers.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Also, IO channels need to be consistent between use in Node.js, use in bundler in Node.js, use in Browser during development, use in Browser with bundles. There needs to be a convention for exposing the "executables" to the script and how to expose the communication channel to the worker. It might be that workers and their executors need a conventionally exported main() that the module loader calls.
This would look like further data- attributes on a script tag that would build a set of entry points for workers. Every worker including the main thread would be able to "spawn" any worker as effectively a child process. The interface for the worker needs to be identical between use in Node.js, in the browser during development, in the browser with a bundle. Each worker would produce a separate bundle and be cross-referenced by relative URL so they can execute each other.
Punting ideas for shared common bundles and service workers as out of scope for minimum viable workers.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: