From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Mark S. Miller
Sent: Friday, November 9, 2012 08:33
> Hi David, thanks for your thoughtful post. I've always used the two-arg form
> of .then[1], but your post makes a strong case for more often using separate
> one-arg .then and .fail calls.
We have found this to be more expressive as well. Especially in ES5
environments, where we can use Q's alias of `catch` instead of `fail`:
p1.then(val => doStuff)
.catch(err => console.error(err));
> I have been using "when" rather than "then". Because these are otherwise
> compatible AFAICT with A+, for the sake of consensus I'm willing to change
> this to "then" everywhere. But before I do, I'd like to make one last plea
> for "when" and see how this community responds.
I think perhaps because of my background as someone who has only ever
programmed for nontrivial amounts of time in curly-bracket languages (C, C++,
C#, JavaScript), I really don't see "then" as part of an "if-then-else" chain.
None of your examples seem confusing to me! I don't know though, as this is
obviously very subjective.
However, I see a lot of value in "when" as a word still. "Then" makes sense
when used as a method:
doThis().then(doThat).then(doAnotherThing)
But "when" makes sense when used as a function:
let this = doThis();
let that = when(this, doThat);
let anotherThing = when(that, doAnotherThing);
or even
let that = when(this).then(doThat);
where here `when()` is either making a value into a promise or assimilating an
untrusted (or crappily-implemented) promise.
It also, to me, makes sense when used as a message, in the sense of
promiseSend. This is a bit less important though I guess.
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
