On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Domenic Denicola <[email protected]> wrote: > On Aug 21, 2013, at 18:31, "Mark S. Miller" <[email protected]> wrote: >> Good idea. As a coercing function, a natural name is Promise.as(v1). Also, >> as a common coercer, brevity is a virtue. > > How about just `Promise`, following `String`, `Number`, `RegExp`, etc.? > > (I tend to agree with Tab that both #a and #b should return a new promise. > But we do need an easy coercion function, as Mark emphasizes.)
Yeah, that's the existing coercer idiom. The other one that's close is Array.from(). It still always produces a new object, but that doesn't necessarily have to be a property of every class's usage. But I like just Promise(), sans "new". Also, while we've settled on "resolve" still retaining its current semantics (promises get adopted, other values just fulfill the promise directly), I think the other part of Domenic's proposal - removing "accept" from the resolver - is still reasonable. There's no behavioral difference between resolving and accepting for .then(), so we don't need it there, and you already need to be careful that your value is wrapped in a promise for .flatMap() callbacks, so requiring the same for the resolver function when those are the semantics you want is fine with me. We'll still need the class static for it, just not the resolver function. I propose we quit with the synonyms, and use Promise.of() like I (and others) proposed a long time ago. ^_^ ~TJ _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
