Based on that really strange @template tag, Object is definitely the
correct response from externc. Google seems to be doing something advanced
there that I'm not even sure is documented.
I also don't think we want to try to parse that mess. If we want it to
return IThenable or something, then we need to apply a patch file, similar
to other changes that we make.
- Josh
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Nov 16, 2016, at 11:20 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On 11/16/16, 11:07 AM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> So you are suggesting to make it a top-level class. Right? Otherwise
> >> we’re not good to go.
> >>
> >> Another problem with the definition in js.swc is that then() returns an
> >> Object, while it should really return a Thenable. I don’t think Thenable
> >> is defined as an interface in JS.
> >
> > You can use patch files and missing.js to tweak the API if you need to.
>
> I’m a bit confused by where the types are being picked up from. js.swc
> definitely gets them, and it looks like it’s getting them from es6.js. I
> see that there actually is an IThenable which is a defined type, although
> IThenable only has a then() method and not a catch() method.
>
> One thing which is throwing me off is the fact that es6.as defines
> Promise.resolve() like this:
> /**
> * @param {VALUE=} opt_value
> * @return {RESULT}
> * @template VALUE
> * @template RESULT := type('Promise',
> * cond(isUnknown(VALUE), unknown(),
> * mapunion(VALUE, (V) =>
> * cond(isTemplatized(V) && sub(rawTypeOf(V), 'IThenable'),
> * templateTypeOf(V, 0),
> * cond(sub(V, 'Thenable'),
> * unknown(),
> * V)))))
> * =:
> */
> Promise.resolve = function(opt_value) {};
>
> I have no clue what all this template stuff means, but the js.swc is
> expecting an Object as the return type.
>
> Promise.reject() has a return type of Promise which seems more correct to
> me. Is Promise.resolve() broken, and if yes, how do we fix it?
>
> >
> >>
> >>> IMO, polyfills should be beads you add to your Application beads if you
> >>> need them.
> >>
> >> Makes sense, although I’m not sure what the bead would look like.
> >> I think manually adding a polyfill for I.E. in the HTML is a reasonable
> >> work-around as well.
> >
> > The bead would use <inject_html>
> >
> > -Alex
> >
>
>
