{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-top-level-await/issues/29","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-top-level-await","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-top-level-await/issues/29/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-top-level-await/issues/29/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-top-level-await/issues/29/events","html_url":"https://github.com/tc39/proposal-top-level-await/issues/29","id":338088251,"node_id":"MDU6SXNzdWUzMzgwODgyNTE=","number":29,"title":"Possible to avoid lock-in to async-only implementations","user":{"login":"jdalton","id":4303,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjQzMDM=","avatar_url":"https://avatars2.githubusercontent.com/u/4303?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/jdalton","html_url":"https://github.com/jdalton","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jdalton/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jdalton/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jdalton/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jdalton/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jdalton/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jdalton/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jdalton/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jdalton/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jdalton/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":19,"created_at":"2018-07-03T23:51:30Z","updated_at":"2018-11-30T23:08:29Z","closed_at":null,"author_association":"MEMBER","body":"At the moment the specification allows implementations to create, instantiate, and evaluate modules in an async or sync fashion. My hunch is that, as is, this proposal will remove the sync option from the table and enforce async all-up. _(correct?)_\r\n\r\nIs there a possible flavor, that the champions of TLA could see, where sync implementations could still be doable? I'm assuming it would mean parent modules don't block for children much like a child module using an async IIFE today.\r\n\r\n"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-top-level-await/issues/comments/443367186","html_url":"https://github.com/tc39/proposal-top-level-await/issues/29#issuecomment-443367186","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/tc39/proposal-top-level-await/issues/29","id":443367186,"node_id":"MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ0MzM2NzE4Ng==","user":{"login":"Jamesernator","id":8518303,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjg1MTgzMDM=","avatar_url":"https://avatars1.githubusercontent.com/u/8518303?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/Jamesernator","html_url":"https://github.com/Jamesernator","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Jamesernator/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Jamesernator/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Jamesernator/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Jamesernator/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Jamesernator/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Jamesernator/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Jamesernator/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Jamesernator/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Jamesernator/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2018-11-30T23:08:29Z","updated_at":"2018-11-30T23:08:29Z","author_association":"NONE","body":"\"In theory\" you could `require` modules even if they have asynchronous work by using `Atomics.wait` and coordinating two agents so that things still work normally otherwise.\r\n\r\nI do say in theory because there's a large amount of stuff that would be need to be done to make things like intrinsics work, cross-agent symbol passing, ensuring the event loop behaves identically outside of `require` amongst other things."}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"Jamesernator"}}