On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Rick Waldron <[email protected]>wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Domenic Denicola < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Why go purposefully against the existing terminology of the JavaScript >> ecosystem? Just say “deferred” where you have “promise” and “promise” where >> you have “future” and you avoid needless confusion and conflict. >> > > It's true that the terminology exists in JS, but it's been identified that > these terms may have been misappropriated. > "misappropriated"? What do you mean? > Kevin's proposal is easier to reason about: > > "Promise to deliver a value in the Future" > This would make "promise" a verb, which is clearly its dominant nat-lang use. However, I don't see how that justifies using it as the name for the Deferred abstraction. "in the Future" uses future to name the time when the value will be delivered. I don't see how this suggests anything appropriate either. For "Promise" as a noun, if I have a promise from you, I do not have the ability to resolve the promise -- that ability is your's. So the ability of resolve the promise is clearly distinct from having the promise. -- Cheers, --MarkM
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
