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
I maintain a package that targets Node.js and the browser. I'm currently trying to make the browser target compatible with Deno.
The main incompatibility is the use of inline workers. My package dynamically generates JS, embeds it into a temporary URL, and creates a worker from it. v1.9 added support for blob URLs, and v1.10 has fixed the structured cloning algorithm; thanks to the Deno team for your hard work on the project.
My package is actually very close to working on v1.10, but I'm facing the issue that postMessage(msg, transfer) fails:
Uncaught Error: Not yet implemented: `transfer` and `options` are not supported.`
I've seen #8341, but I'm specifically requesting that until support for transfer is added, the argument is simply ignored. Obviously, the difference between transferring ownership and cloning is massive internally, but the only effect it has from JS's point of view is that the object is inaccessible from the parent thread. Of course, if implementing #8341 is not too difficult, there's no need for this stop-gap solution.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I maintain a package that targets Node.js and the browser. I'm currently trying to make the browser target compatible with Deno.
The main incompatibility is the use of inline workers. My package dynamically generates JS, embeds it into a temporary URL, and creates a worker from it. v1.9 added support for blob URLs, and v1.10 has fixed the structured cloning algorithm; thanks to the Deno team for your hard work on the project.
My package is actually very close to working on v1.10, but I'm facing the issue that
postMessage(msg, transfer)
fails:I've seen #8341, but I'm specifically requesting that until support for
transfer
is added, the argument is simply ignored. Obviously, the difference between transferring ownership and cloning is massive internally, but the only effect it has from JS's point of view is that the object is inaccessible from the parent thread. Of course, if implementing #8341 is not too difficult, there's no need for this stop-gap solution.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: