On 21.05.2014 01:27, Rik Cabanier wrote:
Likewise here. I don't think anyone is saying that "hardwareConcurrency"
is failing on the grounds of exposing too much system information alone.
The way I read this thread, people either aren't convinced that it's the
right compromise given its usefulness, or that it's the right API for the
task at hand in the first place.
Yeah, I don't think anyone has the answer. My thoughts are that if this
proposed feature works on other platforms, why not here? I understand
Ehsan's points but they can be made to any other platform where this is
used successfully (ie photoshop, parallel builds, web servers, databases,
games, etc)
I don't understand people's assertions why the web platform needs to be
different.
It's generally expected that native applications need to be updated,
recompiled or completely rewritten after some time as platforms and
hardware architectures change. (Microsoft traditionally tries hard to
keep Windows backward compatible, but this is only ever a compromise and
doesn't work universally.) This is not how the Web is supposed to work
-- Web technology needs to be forward compatible. People have previously
pointed out that navigator.hardwareConcurrency could become increasingly
meaningless if not harmful in the foreseeable future.
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
