Implement globalThis.structuredClone

[targos]

See whatwg/html#3414

[MylesBorins]

YES PLEASE!

[Ethan-Arrowood]

Would love to give this a shot! I have some time this week I can get an initial PR up 🚀

[Ethan-Arrowood]

Doing some pre investigation for this feature, I found this existing structuredClone method in lib/internal/util.js

node/lib/internal/util.js

Lines 456 to 469 in 33f9b7f

	function structuredClone(value) {
	const {
	DefaultSerializer,
	DefaultDeserializer,
	} = require('v8');
	const ser = new DefaultSerializer();
	ser._getDataCloneError = hideStackFrames((message) =>
	lazyDOMException(message, 'DataCloneError'));
	ser.writeValue(value);
	const serialized = ser.releaseBuffer();
	const des = new DefaultDeserializer(serialized);
	return des.readValue();
	}

Should I look to modify this?

It seems to only be used in lib/internal/perf/usertiming.js

node/lib/internal/perf/usertiming.js

Line 73 in 33f9b7f

structuredClone(detail) :

---

Additionally, two implementation questions for StructuredSerializeWithTransfer function:

1. How do i check for internal slots?
2. How do I throw a "DataCloneError" DOMException?

For each transferable of transferList:

If transferable has neither an [[ArrayBufferData]] internal slot nor a [[Detached]] internal slot, then throw a "DataCloneError" DOMException.

If transferable has an [[ArrayBufferData]] internal slot and ! IsSharedArrayBuffer(transferable) is true, then throw a "DataCloneError" DOMException.

If memory[transferable] exists, then throw a "DataCloneError" DOMException.

[jasnell]

/cc @addaleax ... she could likely provide a lot more detail and context on these bits than anyone else.

[addaleax]

@Ethan-Arrowood Yeah, so … for a bit of context, the serialization/deserialization API in the v8 module has been around for quite a while, and predates the addition of SharedArrayBuffers, MessagePorts and Worker Threads.

Because the two APIs are used a bit differently, they have diverged a bit; in particular, MessagePort is the API where most of the transfer/clone functionality for host objects has been implemented, whereas the v8 module one is a bit more limited when it comes to that.

Specifically, the v8 module API always encodes into a binary serialization; this also means that, for host objects (i.e. those with internal slots), the v8 module API does not know how to serialize transferable Node.js API objects properly (e.g. FileHandle or MessagePort) because they have internal state that might just not be representable as binary data. It also misses support for things like SharedArrayBuffers altogether.

I think a drop-in structuredClone for Node.js could be:

{
  const { MessageChannel, receiveMessageOnPort } = require('worker_threads');
  const channel = new MessageChannel();
  channel.unref();
  globalThis.structuredClone = function structuredClone(value, transfer) {
    channel.port1.postMessage(value, transfer);
    return receiveMessageOnPort(channel.port2).message;
  }:
}

I think that would actually do well enough in terms of performance and correctness to be added as an initial implementation. It’s obviously not ideal to create two internal MessagePort objects here, but adjusting the v8 module’s API would take quite some time and effort, I assume.

[addaleax]

Also, as for the questions above:

• How do i check for internal slots?

Generally speaking, that’s done through the InternalFieldCount() method in the V8 API, but in the V8 ValueSerializer API, it’s WriteHostObject() that lets us override behavior for these objects.

• How do I throw a "DataCloneError" DOMException?

I think the straightforward answer here is ThrowDataCloneException() from node_messaging.cc?

Also, feel free to reach out in some other way if you’d want to have a synchronous conversation about this in some way 🙂

[Ethan-Arrowood]

Thank you @addaleax ! I'll give your solution a shot for now, and then go from there. There appears to be some WPT tests for the new spec; hopefully, those will let us know if things are working or not 😁

[CarterLi]

Found something about receiveMessageOnPort

#34355 (comment)

[fregante]

Will this be back ported to v16? #40756