I get why Actors aren't wholly supported in JS (because JS is single threaded), but why then are the concurrent Types annotated with @Js?
This leaves you with an unhelpful FireBug error of fan.concurrent.ActorPool.make is not a function and a Fantom search result of Actors in JS?
Any chance of the concurrent FanDoc being updated with a bit of JS specific info?
andyMon 9 Jul 2012
We needed to support Actor.locals for JavaScript (its the only thing actually implemented out of concurrent). So ActorPool and Future got marked to make JS runtimes happy. Bit hacky in retrospect I guess.
SlimerDude Mon 9 Jul 2012
I get why Actors aren't wholly supported in JS (because JS is single threaded), but why then are the concurrent Types annotated with
@Js?This leaves you with an unhelpful FireBug error of
fan.concurrent.ActorPool.make is not a functionand a Fantom search result of Actors in JS?Any chance of the concurrent FanDoc being updated with a bit of JS specific info?
andy Mon 9 Jul 2012
We needed to support
Actor.localsfor JavaScript (its the only thing actually implemented out ofconcurrent). SoActorPoolandFuturegot marked to make JS runtimes happy. Bit hacky in retrospect I guess.