Re: Deprecating Future's .then()

Sean Hogan <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.web.dom.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On 6/06/13 10:56 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Sean Hogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Should the spec continue to allow this behavior?
>>
>> or ...
>>
>> Should the resolve algorithm - which is currently infinite unwrap for
>> accepted / fulfilled futures - also be infinite unwrap for rejected futures?
> I'm satisfied with either behavior.  It might be nice to have it
> mirror the then/chain behavior, where it fully-unwraps or
> single-unwraps as appropriate, but I'd likely be fine with both doing
> single-unwrapping or both doing full-unwrapping.
>
> ~TJ
>

I think the most contentious behavior would be what to do with mixed 
sequences of accepted / rejected Futures.

Should

     Future.accept( Future.reject ( Future.accept( true ) ) )
     .then( function(val) { console.log( val ); } , function(err) { 
console.error( err ); });

behave the same as

     Future.reject( Future.accept( Future.reject ( Future.accept( true ) 
) ) )
     .then( function(val) { console.log( val ); } , function(err) { 
console.error( err ); });


Is it just a nonsense usage - most likely to be a programming error?
If so, what is the best / noisiest way to fail?
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.