I've updated my proposal to use `+>` instead of `|>`, based on this discussion:
https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pipeline-operator/issues/50 https://github.com/TheNavigateur/proposal-pipeline-operator-for-function-composition On Sat, 26 Aug 2017 at 13:17 T.J. Crowder <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 3:07 AM, Jordan Harband <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > "incompatible" is a very strong and likely incorrect claim. `(sync1 |> > sync2 |> async1).then(x => x |> sync3 |> async2).then(x => async3)` could > work just fine. > > Or indeed, a robust proposal might allow for async functions in the > pipeline (with some indication, so you can look at the code and reason > about it; although `then` accepts non-thenable values and you can't tell by > looking, so...). Conceptually: > > ```js > let x = sync1 |> sync2 |*> async1 |> sync3 |*> async2 |*> async3; > ``` > > -- T.J. Crowder > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
