Sorry for the noise. That last point was mostly tangential, but felt it should be mentioned.
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Adam Crabtree <[email protected]> wrote: > IMHO, node needs as few non-IO browser non-compliant APIs as possible. If > something like setImmediate will suffice, use it instead of nextTick. If > something like thisTick is necessary, ideally it would be done in pure > JavaScript or in a browser-compliant way so any modules depending on it can > more easily be ported to the browser. > > See: > > https://github.com/substack/node-browserify/blob/ac208b825a68d5a0f0390eee5450eec8605529a5/wrappers/node_compat.js > > > For me, it's ultimately about code reuse, and node not > being perceived (valid or not) as a fork of JavaScript.The node and > JavaScript communities as a whole will be far better served with compatible > APIs. If an internal APi will suffice, keep it internal and use > setImmediate externally. If thisTick is necessary externally, if possible, > implement it in pure browser-compliant JavaScript a la Streams, etc... > > Cheers, > Adam Crabtree > > On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Jorge <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Jun 1, 2012, at 6:29 PM, Jorge wrote: >> > On May 30, 2012, at 12:57 AM, Tim Caswell wrote >> >>> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Jorge <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> FYI: setImmediate === nextTick and identical to a setTimeout(f,0) >> without the clamping. >> >> >> >> so I guess in a way setImmediate(fn) could be described fairly >> accurately as a faster setTimeout(fn, 0). As I understand timer events get >> put at the end of the queue as well. >> >> >> >> <snip> >> > >> > LOL, see "nextTick(f) vs SetTimeout(f, 0)" (it's from ~ 2 years ago >> :-P): >> > >> > < >> http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs/browse_thread/thread/b564ac42ac53e424/7b85530b465f578d >> > >> > -- >> > Jorge. >> >> >> A jewel from that thread: >> >> >> On Aug 30, 2010, at 4:36 AM, Tim Caswell wrote >> > On Aug 29, 2010 6:43 PM, "Vitali Lovich" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> That setTimeout(f, 0) can be optimized to perform significantly better >> than it currently does. >> > >> > Why complicate the code for a use case that shouldn't exist? Namely >> using setTimeout when you really mean nextTick. >> > >> > <snip> >> >> >> :-P >> -- >> Jorge. > > > > > -- > Better a little with righteousness > than much gain with injustice. > Proverbs 16:8 > -- Better a little with righteousness than much gain with injustice. Proverbs 16:8
