Switching to async/await from Task.jsm/yield

J. Ryan Stinnett jryans at gmail.com
Thu Mar 16 23:18:35 UTC 2017

Sounds like a good change to make from the discussion so far.

If there are issues with stack traces, I would assume having more of our
code base using async / await is a good way to apply pressure for stack
trace improvements (if needed) that will benefit everyone.

- Ryan

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Kris Maglione <kmaglione at mozilla.com>

> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 05:39:06PM -0500, J. Ryan Stinnett wrote:
>> For modules that have already converted, is there any performance change
>> (good or bad) between async / await vs. Task?
> I haven't noticed any differences either way, but I also haven't done any
> explicit profiling. There's definitely a difference in the way we collect
> async stacks in async/await code vs. with the Promise.jsm promises that
> Task.jsm uses, but that shouldn't show up much on release.
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Kris Maglione <kmaglione at mozilla.com>
>> wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:29:15PM -0700, Dave Townsend wrote:
>>> Writing code in standard JS is always better for the web, makes it easier
>>>> to onboard new engineers and allows for better support in developer
>>>> tools.
>>>> So I'd like to propose that we switch to the standard way of writing
>>>> these
>>>> functions immediately. New code should use async/await instead of
>>>> Task.jsm
>>>> going forwards.
>>> +1
>>> I've already started doing this in places where using Task.jsm was
>>> unwieldy, and it's improved things tremendously.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/firefox-dev/attachments/20170316/205f5d35/attachment.html>

More information about the firefox-dev mailing list