Cancel Token proposal withdrawl
# Domenic Denicola (7 years ago)
Why do you say "regarding performance"? That seems made up with no evidence.
Why do you say "regarding performance"? That seems made up with no evidence. ________________________________ From: Isiah Meadows <isiahmeadows at gmail.com> Sent: Jan 5, 2017 20:09 To: es-discuss at mozilla.org Subject: Cancel Token proposal withdrawl The [latest proposal][1] has been withdrawn due to [Google resistance][2] regarding performance. What concerns did they have, and with what parts? It's hard to figure out what the problem is and come up with ideas when it's all smoke and mirrors. And yes, I've tried searching for any traces of an answer, but I've found pretty much none, using multiple search engines. Please, could I get some sort of idea what is actually wrong with the proposal, what's driving them to be so strongly against it? :-( [1]: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-cancelable-promises [2]: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-cancelable-promises/issues/70#issuecomment-267414933 ----- Isiah Meadows me at isiahmeadows.com _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss at mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20170106/43803f8b/attachment.html>
# Isiah Meadows (7 years ago)
Okay...I may have misremembered the general reason (I thought I saw perf concerns stated somewhere, but I can't remember precisely where), but I've yet to see anything significant in the open about why they were so against it. That's why I'm asking what drove them against it.
Okay...I may have misremembered the general reason (I thought I saw perf concerns stated somewhere, but I can't remember precisely where), but I've yet to see anything significant in the open about why they were so against it. That's why I'm asking what drove them against it. ----- Isiah Meadows me at isiahmeadows.com On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Domenic Denicola <d at domenic.me> wrote: > Why do you say "regarding performance"? That seems made up with no evidence. > > > ________________________________ > From: Isiah Meadows <isiahmeadows at gmail.com> > Sent: Jan 5, 2017 20:09 > To: es-discuss at mozilla.org > Subject: Cancel Token proposal withdrawl > > The [latest proposal][1] has been withdrawn due to [Google > resistance][2] regarding performance. What concerns did they have, and > with what parts? It's hard to figure out what the problem is and come > up with ideas when it's all smoke and mirrors. And yes, I've tried > searching for any traces of an answer, but I've found pretty much > none, using multiple search engines. > > Please, could I get some sort of idea what is actually wrong with the > proposal, what's driving them to be so strongly against it? :-( > > [1]: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-cancelable-promises > [2]: > https://github.com/tc39/proposal-cancelable-promises/issues/70#issuecomment-267414933 > > ----- > > Isiah Meadows > me at isiahmeadows.com > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > es-discuss at mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
# Isiah Meadows (7 years ago)
I do suspect most of these will end up answered in the next meeting's notes, though. Hopefully, they do. So on that note, I'll let this sit for a bit longer (and probably re-ask then if it ends up not addressed).
I do suspect most of these will end up answered in the next meeting's notes, though. Hopefully, they do. So on that note, I'll let this sit for a bit longer (and probably re-ask then if it ends up not addressed). ----- Isiah Meadows me at isiahmeadows.com On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Isiah Meadows <isiahmeadows at gmail.com> wrote: > Okay...I may have misremembered the general reason (I thought I saw > perf concerns stated somewhere, but I can't remember precisely where), > but I've yet to see anything significant in the open about why they > were so against it. That's why I'm asking what drove them against it. > ----- > > Isiah Meadows > me at isiahmeadows.com > > > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Domenic Denicola <d at domenic.me> wrote: >> Why do you say "regarding performance"? That seems made up with no evidence. >> >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Isiah Meadows <isiahmeadows at gmail.com> >> Sent: Jan 5, 2017 20:09 >> To: es-discuss at mozilla.org >> Subject: Cancel Token proposal withdrawl >> >> The [latest proposal][1] has been withdrawn due to [Google >> resistance][2] regarding performance. What concerns did they have, and >> with what parts? It's hard to figure out what the problem is and come >> up with ideas when it's all smoke and mirrors. And yes, I've tried >> searching for any traces of an answer, but I've found pretty much >> none, using multiple search engines. >> >> Please, could I get some sort of idea what is actually wrong with the >> proposal, what's driving them to be so strongly against it? :-( >> >> [1]: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-cancelable-promises >> [2]: >> https://github.com/tc39/proposal-cancelable-promises/issues/70#issuecomment-267414933 >> >> ----- >> >> Isiah Meadows >> me at isiahmeadows.com >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> es-discuss at mozilla.org >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
The latest proposal has been withdrawn due to Google resistance regarding performance. What concerns did they have, and with what parts? It's hard to figure out what the problem is and come up with ideas when it's all smoke and mirrors. And yes, I've tried searching for any traces of an answer, but I've found pretty much none, using multiple search engines.
Please, could I get some sort of idea what is actually wrong with the proposal, what's driving them to be so strongly against it? :-(