Sounds like a good change to make from the discussion so far. If there are issues with stack traces, I would assume having more of our code base using async / await is a good way to apply pressure for stack trace improvements (if needed) that will benefit everyone.
- Ryan On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Kris Maglione <kmagli...@mozilla.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 05:39:06PM -0500, J. Ryan Stinnett wrote: > >> For modules that have already converted, is there any performance change >> (good or bad) between async / await vs. Task? >> > > I haven't noticed any differences either way, but I also haven't done any > explicit profiling. There's definitely a difference in the way we collect > async stacks in async/await code vs. with the Promise.jsm promises that > Task.jsm uses, but that shouldn't show up much on release. > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Kris Maglione <kmagli...@mozilla.com> >> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:29:15PM -0700, Dave Townsend wrote: >>> >>> Writing code in standard JS is always better for the web, makes it easier >>>> to onboard new engineers and allows for better support in developer >>>> tools. >>>> So I'd like to propose that we switch to the standard way of writing >>>> these >>>> functions immediately. New code should use async/await instead of >>>> Task.jsm >>>> going forwards. >>>> >>>> >>> +1 >>> >>> I've already started doing this in places where using Task.jsm was >>> unwieldy, and it's improved things tremendously. >>> >> _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
