Re: Promises: final steps

Mark Miller <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.lang.javascript.ecmascript4.general,gmane.comp.web.dom.general
Message-ID <CAK5yZYg6VQX4-SQqHbvyJjeWUw1yK+XSwmkc-oCyXe3y9BRS4g@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Kevin Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> It's not clear to me why this, or your `Promise.throw`, is better than
>>
>> ```js
>> somePromise.done(...)
>> // or
>> somePromise.then(...).done()
>> ```
>
>
> Not *much* better, I'd say, but IMO a `done` method which accepts a
> callback overlaps too much with `then`, and a `done` method without a
> callback just looks like a wart in need of removal.  : )
>
> Visually, to me, wrapping beats capping.  But that's just me.
>
> In the end, I like neither wrapping nor capping.  In my own work I've
> preferred to define conditions under which certain rejections are
> interpreted as program errors, thereby avoiding the wrapping/capping issue
> entirely.  (I can elaborate if anyone's interested.)
>

Please do.



>
> { Kevin }
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>


-- 
  Cheers,
  --MarkM

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
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.