Just thought I'd throw this out there: I've been off-and-on working on my own function composition strawman [1] for about a year now [2]. I decided just now to make some edits to clean up the proposal and address some other ideas that have come up since (e.g. async composition).
[1]: https://github.com/isiahmeadows/function-composition-proposal [2]: https://esdiscuss.org/topic/function-composition-syntax ----- Isiah Meadows [email protected] Looking for web consulting? Or a new website? Send me an email and we can get started. www.isiahmeadows.com On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:48 AM, Naveen Chawla <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
