On 1/28/2011 8:43 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote: > On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 6:05 AM, Kris Zyp <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > Exactly. On the NodeJS mailing list there is constant, > never-ending stream of messages from (generally new users) who are > complaining about the pain of callbacks (not from typing some API, > I have yet to ever get a request for shorter syntax for > node-promise, which is one of the commonly used helper libraries). > In fact I think someone recently created another continuation > library (in the same vein as Narrative, generators, etc.), > continuing to add to our collective experience in this area. I > could look up the address if desired. > > > Please do. More collective experience is good.
https://github.com/laverdet/node-fibers Looking at the language in the docs, this may just use event-loop stacking to "wait" or yield. > > However, I think your comparisons show your missing the point of this > strawman. AFAIK, all the systems you cite, including node-promise > which implements CommonJS promises/A and your proposed use of shallow > continuations, are all only for helping express asynchrony within a > single vat. None of these are about supporting communication to > objects in separate or remote vats. So none of these should be taken > as competitors for this strawman. This strawman includes means for > spawning new vats, talking between the spawner and the spawned, and an > underspecified-at-the-moment (but see qcomm's Q.makePromise()) > pluggable extension point for extending this semantics over networks. So Web Workers are the competition? You can build far references on Web Workers, right? Kris
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
