Oleg Pyzhcov

@alexandru there are at least two lawful models for `TaskLocal` behavior in fibers: 1. we share everything by default unless you explicitly use `isolate` 2. we isolate every fiber (it...

@jvican well, given it's been over a year, probably no. I'm watching related developments in cats-effect 3 [here](https://github.com/typelevel/cats-effect/pull/1393) though. I'm not sure what's the absolute best model would possibly be,...

> I feel like that at best, we could have it as a `Task` option, not `Local` because I don't see a way to have this strategy with `Future` I...

Actually, if I use Futures, I get similar results: ```scala import scala.concurrent._ import duration._ import ExecutionContext.Implicits._ Await.result(Future { throw new NoSuchMethodError() }, 10.seconds) ``` The error will be logged (via...

@kag0 this looks very much like what `isolate` does for Future [(impl here)](https://github.com/monix/monix/blob/971b0462e5a621a971144912e409d58a75083be5/monix-execution/shared/src/main/scala/monix/execution/misc/CanBindLocals.scala#L139). Can you check if you can use `Local.isolate` as a drop-in replacement for your `propagate` function? The...

@kag0 isolate should work for this uses - you continue with what you had before, and any 3rd-party code or parallel process gets a copy for its uses. That was...

@cquiroz hi, I'm interested in giving it a shot too, but I have almost zero experience in using scalajs-react and its idioms. If you have a simple project with scalajs-react...

Yep. I've faced the same problem :)

> Monix and ZIO can implement it with a subset of their functionality i.e. all they need is copy-on-fork semantics, which I think they have We definitely don't have copy-on-fork...