> If the second argument is optional, it's possible to have both one-arg and
> two-arg styles in the same API.
> What do people think about this idea?
>
Maybe - minimalism served the class proposal quite well. It might be a
good strategy here, too.
Here's what I'm thinking:
// Creates a new promise
let promise = new Promise();
// Resolves the promise (ala Q)
promise.resolve(value);
// Rejects the promise (ala Q)
promise.reject(value);
// A handle to the eventual value of the promise
promise.future;
// The then method (ala Promises/A+)
promise.future.then(val => {
// Success handler
}, err => {
// Error handler
});
// Returns a future for the value
Promise.when(value);
// Returns a rejected future with the specified error
Promise.reject(error);
// Returns a future for every eventual value in the list
Promise.whenAll(list);
// Returns a future for the first resolved future in the list
Promise.whenAny(list);
Initial implementation here: https://github.com/jscloud/Promise
I think it's important to separate "Promise" from "Future". Back in the
CommonJS mailing list days, there was contention between Promises/A
(thenables) and Promises/B (basically Q). But they really are
complementary: futures and promises.
- Kevin
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
