Re: Promises: final steps

"Tab Atkins Jr." <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.lang.javascript.ecmascript4.general,gmane.comp.web.dom.general
Message-ID <CAAWBYDBd0Q4+q6E=jq-YJ27tjRtv2y9RB5mS7aaE8ee-eaQnsw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 6:37 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk-6shE6wEKUUpmR6Xm/[email protected]> wrote:
> As many of you hopefully know, we're trying to nail down the design of
> promises in JavaScript so we can declare consensus on it and start
> shipping it in implementations. If you're interested in the
> particulars I strongly recommend reading through
> https://github.com/domenic/promises-unwrapping/blob/master/README.md
> and partaking in the
> https://github.com/domenic/promises-unwrapping/issues discussion. The
> next TC39 is coming close and this really needs to be resolved (not
> settled!) by then as there are many APIs relying on promises now.
>
> Eg in https://github.com/domenic/promises-unwrapping/issues/8 we
> decided on Promise.cast() as IsPromise(x) ? x : Promise.resolve(x).
>
> https://github.com/domenic/promises-unwrapping/issues/18 suggests
> adding Promise.prototype.finally() and
> https://github.com/domenic/promises-unwrapping/issues/13 discusses
> which convenience methods we should add in the first iteration.
>
> I suggest we focus on the minimal subset that works (which I know is
> different for people, but let's aim for consensus) and then iterate
> again after we have a couple of implementations out there.

I'm fine with the subset defined in Domenic's spec - it's compatible
with what we've discussed, and is easy to extend into the flatMap
semantics I want.

I've commented on the issue threads in github.

~TJ
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.