On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 2:48 AM, Mark S. Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree that an AP2 system, which is what we are discussing, should not have > a method named .fulfill for the reasons you state. A promise which, at the > AP2.flatMap level is "accepted" or "adopted" is, at the AP2.then level > "resolved". I suggest the method in question be called .resolve, that it > accept, not recursively unwrap/flatten/assimilate at all. The AP2.flatMap > programmer will understand .resolve as accepting. The AP2.then programmer > will understand .resolve as resolving.
I remembered we previously reached this conclusion and then you ended up reversing yourself: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2013AprJun/0213.html Did something change or am I misinterpreting something? (I'm in favor of removing fulfill() myself, for what it's worth.) -- http://annevankesteren.nl/ _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
