5 ms·

I think part of the problem is that there is no other thread (outside of service workers), so that's why it's hard. In C# I would just fire up another thread to

I think part of the problem is that there is no other thread (outside of service workers), so that's why it's hard. In C# I would just fire up another thread to do the work and I don't have to worry about blocking the UI until I want to notify the UI from that thread. But I can't fire up a separate thread in JS so everything is done on the UI thread

PittleyDunkin 2y ago
> But I can't fire up a separate thread in JS so everything is done on the UI thread Yea targeting the web is nuts if you have other options!
chii 2y ago
The browser as a runtime is the epitome of worse-is-better.
- PittleyDunkin 2y ago
  [flagged]
rafram 2y ago
Outside of workers, of which service workers are one type.
Yoric 2y ago
I don't think it's the problem. I think that it's a combination of two things: 1. many webdevs just have no clue what a thread is, because generally, they don't need it, so it isn't taught; 2. most of the documentation you can find online was written by people (and now ChatGPT) who don't understand async, sprinkle the word randomly and tweak things until they seem to work. As a consequence, webdevs learn that async is magic. Which is a shame, because the underlying model is almost simple (the fact that we have both micro-tasks and tasks complicates things a bit).
- bsuvc 2y ago
  > many webdevs just have no clue what a thread is, because generally, they don't need it, so it isn't taught JavaScript doesn't have threads.
  - Retr0id 2y ago
    This is not meaningfully true in 2024
    - Retr0id 2y ago
      *2025 (although still true of 2024 and several preceding years, heh)
  - soulofmischief 2y ago
    Parent commenter helped implement async in JS, they know what they are talking about. JS has threads locked behind semantics. Web workers run on separate threads. I do a lot of heavy parallel processing that never blocks the UI with them all the time.
    - bsuvc 2y ago
      I stand corrected. It looks like web workers is the way for JavaScript to do multi-threading. Async has always been enough for what I need to do in the front end, as most of my long running processes are just calling a back end. Edit to add: for context, I am a full stack developer and know what threads are... I just never have needed them in the browser.
      - soulofmischief 2y ago
        Web workers are great for local compute and isolation. Unfortunately it's a hassle managing sane pooling because different platforms have different worker limits. On the other hand, the isolation guarantees are strong. There aren't really any footguns. Messaging is straightforward, works with a lot of data types and supports channels for inter-worker communication.
bfgeek 2y ago
You can create a new thread via. `new Worker` but using a worker requires a separate file, and lots of serialisation code as you communicate via `postMessage`. TC39 module expressions helps but not a lot of movement recently. https://github.com/tc39/proposal-module-expressions?tab=readme-ov-file#problem-space https://github.com/tc39/proposal-module-expressions?tab=read...
- bakkoting 2y ago
  There's some progress on that proposal, just happening elsewhere. https://github.com/tc39/proposal-esm-phase-imports https://github.com/tc39/proposal-esm-phase-imports defines machinery for importing a ModuleSource object which you can instantiate as a Worker, and once that's done module expressions would just be syntax which evaluates to a ModuleSource rather than needing a separate import.

PittleyDunkin 2y ago

> But I can't fire up a separate thread in JS so everything is done on the UI thread Yea targeting the web is nuts if you have other options!

chii 2y ago

The browser as a runtime is the epitome of worse-is-better.

PittleyDunkin 2y ago
[flagged]

rafram 2y ago

Outside of workers, of which service workers are one type.

Yoric 2y ago

I don't think it's the problem. I think that it's a combination of two things: 1. many webdevs just have no clue what a thread is, because generally, they don't need it, so it isn't taught; 2. most of the documentation you can find online was written by people (and now ChatGPT) who don't understand async, sprinkle the word randomly and tweak things until they seem to work. As a consequence, webdevs learn that async is magic. Which is a shame, because the underlying model is almost simple (the fact that we have both micro-tasks and tasks complicates things a bit).

bsuvc 2y ago
> many webdevs just have no clue what a thread is, because generally, they don't need it, so it isn't taught JavaScript doesn't have threads.
- Retr0id 2y ago
  This is not meaningfully true in 2024
  - Retr0id 2y ago
    *2025 (although still true of 2024 and several preceding years, heh)
- soulofmischief 2y ago
  Parent commenter helped implement async in JS, they know what they are talking about. JS has threads locked behind semantics. Web workers run on separate threads. I do a lot of heavy parallel processing that never blocks the UI with them all the time.
  - bsuvc 2y ago
    I stand corrected. It looks like web workers is the way for JavaScript to do multi-threading. Async has always been enough for what I need to do in the front end, as most of my long running processes are just calling a back end. Edit to add: for context, I am a full stack developer and know what threads are... I just never have needed them in the browser.
    - soulofmischief 2y ago
      Web workers are great for local compute and isolation. Unfortunately it's a hassle managing sane pooling because different platforms have different worker limits. On the other hand, the isolation guarantees are strong. There aren't really any footguns. Messaging is straightforward, works with a lot of data types and supports channels for inter-worker communication.

bfgeek 2y ago

You can create a new thread via. `new Worker` but using a worker requires a separate file, and lots of serialisation code as you communicate via `postMessage`. TC39 module expressions helps but not a lot of movement recently. https://github.com/tc39/proposal-module-expressions?tab=readme-ov-file#problem-space https://github.com/tc39/proposal-module-expressions?tab=read...

bakkoting 2y ago
There's some progress on that proposal, just happening elsewhere. https://github.com/tc39/proposal-esm-phase-imports https://github.com/tc39/proposal-esm-phase-imports defines machinery for importing a ModuleSource object which you can instantiate as a Worker, and once that's done module expressions would just be syntax which evaluates to a ModuleSource rather than needing a separate import.