Not sure how this is relevant, since this is about types rather than identity, and I'd say typing values is *far* from a solved problem beyond the basic concept of "all values have a type"...\* ;-)
\* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_system ----- 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 Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 5:59 PM, Claude Petit <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't want to be annoying, but object identity is something solved since a > long long time by classical OOP ¯\_(ツ)_/ ¯ But I might by "wrong" as > usual... > > -----Original Message----- > From: Isiah Meadows <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, April 13, 2018 9:01 PM > To: Jordan Harband <[email protected]> > Cc: es-discuss <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [strawman] Symbol.thenable proposal > > I can't remember where, but I recall seeing this discussed elsewhere (maybe > in the TC39 meeting notes?) and the conclusion was basically > ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. I'm not convinced myself it's actually worth the extra symbol just > to make something not considered a thenable - all these Promise libraries > have been able to get away with it for this long; what makes ES promises any > different here? (Dynamic import is probably the only possible case I can > think of short certain proxies in terms of things that could be considered > thenables but shouldn't always.) > > Worst case, you can just return a value that happens to have a promise in a > property, like in `{value: somePromise}` - nobody resolves that except `co` > IIRC. > ----- > > 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 Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 4:20 PM, Jordan Harband <[email protected]> wrote: >> `await import(path)` wouldn't ever be able to do anything besides >> Promise.resolve; I'm pretty confident that this proposal, or something >> like it, is the only possibility to make ModuleRecords (for modules >> that export a `then` function) not be considered thenable. >> >> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 8:02 AM, Guy Bedford <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> It's worth noting that the driving use case here is coming from >>> NodeJS development hitting issues where the guaranteed result for >>> dynamic import resolution can't be assumed to be a module namespace, >>> although please correct me if I'm wrong here Gus. >>> >>> Alternatively could this mitigation be handled by creating a >>> `Promise.resolveStrict` primitive that explicitly opts-out of >>> thenable resolution in the promise chain? >>> >>> I'd think we are getting further and further away now from >>> third-party promise implementation interops, that such approaches >>> might make sense to consider at this point, in the name of returning >>> to more well-defined semantics. >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 3:33 AM Gus Caplan <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hello all, >>>> >>>> In an effort to curtail the interesting behavior of Promise.resolve >>>> (especially with regard to dynamic import), I have created a >>>> proposal for a well-known symbol which will allow an object to not >>>> be treated as a "thenable." >>>> >>>> I am privy to the current protocol proposal which might be a better >>>> fit for this, but due to dynamic import already being stage 3, I >>>> don't feel we should wait for it to come to fruition. >>>> >>>> Comments and suggestions are of course quite welcome at the repo [1]. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> -Gus >>>> >>>> [1]: https://github.com/devsnek/proposal-symbol-thenable >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >> > > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. > http://www.avg.com > _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
