Actually, shouldn't it be added to TaskRunner rather than SequencedTaskRunner?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "scheduler-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scheduler-de...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/scheduler-dev/CAP0-QpuoXRKTOPvrZgZrbzNimaM18AY%3DSvqH46ZjcsA5Km8bOA%40mail.gmail.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/scheduler-dev/CAJTZ7LKzhEdZhj99U6zUU%2BVJx08PZj9-Xqr7wj-DGuZF_exPoA%40mail.gmail.com.
Would there be a reason to ban TaskRunner::PostTaskAndReplyWithResult but not TaskRunner::PostTask? Both methods can post a task to another thread.
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 12:19 PM François Doray <fdo...@chromium.org> wrote:Would there be a reason to ban TaskRunner::PostTaskAndReplyWithResult but not TaskRunner::PostTask? Both methods can post a task to another thread.I think altimin is referring to Blink's worker_pool:: API ? If you have a TaskRunner* you can already use its PostTaskAndReply so don't see why PostTaskAndReplyWithResult would be a problem.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "platform-architecture-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to platform-architect...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/platform-architecture-dev/CAP0-QpstxPikFtNyCM0iStcxO1nfnszOSS9YGYhjJDHA-hY4Lw%40mail.gmail.com.