Re: Deprecating Future's .then()

"Mark S. Miller" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.web.dom.general
Message-ID <CABHxS9hZxmAKPtJQXiTWxqEiyKWbGQufKB6u=0pCjSe8hsurQw@mail.gmail.com>
Me too. I find your points about why AP2 (recursive unwrapping of callback
argument) is superior to AP3 (recursive unwrapping of callback
result) persuasive.


On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 7:09 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Anne van Kesteren <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 12:37 AM, Sean Hogan <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >> Since the spec hasn't been updated, is there more info on how
> >> `Future.accept()` will be fixed to support that code sample?
> >
> > My understanding is that the TC39-consensus is to keep the recursive
> > unwrapping for return values of the then() callbacks.
>
> That is not yet consensus.  It was rough agreement at the meeting, but
> Brendan and I feel it's wrong.
>
> ~TJ
>
>


-- 
    Cheers,
    --MarkM
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.