Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Scheduling APIs: scheduler.postTask #546

Closed
shaseley opened this issue Jun 23, 2021 · 4 comments
Closed

Scheduling APIs: scheduler.postTask #546

shaseley opened this issue Jun 23, 2021 · 4 comments
Labels
w3c-cg Specifications in W3C Community Groups (e.g., WICG, Privacy CG)

Comments

@shaseley
Copy link

Request for Mozilla Position on an Emerging Web Specification

  • Specification Title: Prioritized Task Scheduling
  • Specification or proposal URL: https://wicg.github.io/scheduling-apis/
  • Caniuse.com URL (optional):
  • Bugzilla URL (optional):
  • Mozillians who can provide input (optional): Maybe @bdekoz (this API was presented at WebPerf WG a few times).

Other information

@annevk
Copy link
Contributor

annevk commented Jun 25, 2021

@smaug---- @Bas-moz @mystor @farre might also have thoughts on this. The API seems reasonable to me. One thing I vaguely recall in relation to this is whether it should reuse more of the setTimeout() semantics when the delay parameter is used. As in, perhaps HTML's timer initialization steps should be generalized so they can be reused here and implementations can apply the same kind of mitigations.

@annevk annevk added the w3c-cg Specifications in W3C Community Groups (e.g., WICG, Privacy CG) label Jun 25, 2021
@mystor
Copy link

mystor commented Jun 25, 2021

I haven't looked into this too deeply but the API seems reasonable enough on a surface level. Figuring out exactly how this will interact with gecko's event loops and scheduling work may be an interesting issue, but I'd defer to @Bas-moz and @krispyfries as the experts on how our event loops work. I imagine that the biggest part of this review would be when implementing to make sure that the APIs are easy/reasonable for us to implement.

@sefeng211
Copy link
Member

I don't think anyone is objecting this API, and I believe @smaug---- and @Bas-moz both agreed that this is worth prototyping.

Can we change the status of this API to worth prototyping?

@annevk
Copy link
Contributor

annevk commented Oct 22, 2021

@sefeng211 yeah, please create a PR. It's probably big enough for a dashboard entry.

@annevk annevk closed this as completed in ea5611d Oct 25, 2021
Daasin pushed a commit to Daasin/standards-positions that referenced this issue Jan 5, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
w3c-cg Specifications in W3C Community Groups (e.g., WICG, Privacy CG)
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants