I find this option name fun and maybe It could be a right name in NodeJS context.
I know you may not have much consideration for HTML5 (mainly because security should have been addressed in priority) but still...
In HTML5, many APIs propose Sync and Async modes:
- XMLHttpRequest 1 & 2: http://www.w3.org/TR/XMLHttpRequest/
-> it would not be impacted by this option as is because "Sync" isn't part of property names in the API
- File API: http://www.w3.org/TR/FileAPI/
- File System API: http://www.w3.org/TR/file-system-api/
- File Writer API: http://www.w3.org/TR/file-writer-api/
- Indexed Database API: http://www.w3.org/TR/IndexedDB
- Web SQL Database (inactive): http://www.w3.org/TR/webdatabase/
This didn't make much sense before because it was blocking the User Interface, but now, we have the Web Workers allowing to take advantage of multi-threading (or at least multi processing). It then looks to me that using synchronous APIs in Workers should be perfectly acceptable, even more when we know that the importScript() method available in this context works synchronously.
Most of them have synchronous APIs and take advantage of multi-threading
I'm not aware of all the details of all of them, most should not get errors from this option as they don't have "Sync" in their method names. In this case only the option name "stupid" is a bit hard (should our feelings being hurt when we don't choose NodeJS?)
To end my purpose, I would also mention Wakanda, which runs JS code on server synchronously by default. It support natively some HTML5 and NodeJS APIs to:
- start event loops like contexts when it make sense,
- be compatible with some existing libraries,
- and of course enhance learning curve.
Maybe a warning is ok, because such code could not be reused in any context (main user interface context, or Node.js context), but then, isn't the "stupid" option name a bit too strong?