Shouldn't timers be specified?

Andrea Giammarchi andrea.giammarchi at
Sun Jan 22 03:02:03 PST 2012

process.nextTick already landed in browsers, as concept, it's called

About Rhino, that implementation is not the equivalent of what we have in
browsers, where the most useful thing ever is rarely used out there even if
completely cross browsers but IE where de-facto standard is shim amble
without problems.

I am talking about extra arguments any setInterval/Timeout accept, i.e.

setTimeout(callback, 1, some, thing);

where callback is

function callback(some, thing) { ... }

and arguments will be sent when the timeout is burned.

Here fully node.js compatible Rhino timers I have used in wru:

Said that, the fact node.js and browsers are sometimes way too much
misaligned is something I have blogged about already and in this case
node.js does not even return an Int32 as any browsers does, it returns an
object, still unique, but not an Number.

It would be nice to have these methods well defined across all platforms


On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 6:19 AM, Brandon Benvie
<brandon at>wrote:

> Absolutely agree. I don't see a place for Node's 1ms resolution in
> browsers, which was the impetus for raising the issue. I see a place for
> Node (and other non-browser platforms) to implement their own host timers
> that provide higher resolution (In fact Node's process.nextTick(callback)
> is a good example of host functionality that's useful but wouldn't belong
> in a JS spec). But the point is that the lack of specification has already
> resulted in incompatible implementations of ostensibly the same basically
> required core language functionality.
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list