I have not read everything about the promise/future/re-promise subject
but what I have read seems to show that everyone has a personal
understanding of the thing.
So please see
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcrypto/2013Sep/0003.html ,
code example that I have written for WebCrypto (ie real working case not
using WebCrypto rewritten with WebCrypto promises), as explained I am
using 'done' despite of the fact that it might be removed, because I
don't see why I should use 'then' if I am not chaining anything.
As explained again, the example shows maybe that promises here are a
kind of artifice, until other APIs implement promises.
How should I write this without 'done'?
Regards
Aymeric
Le 08/09/2013 19:06, Anne van Kesteren a écrit :
(Added back the other lists.)
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 3:58 AM, Brendan Eich <bren...@secure.meer.net> wrote:
Let's put done back in. It's the right thing.
Given what has been said thus far
https://github.com/domenic/promises-unwrapping/issues/19 my
inclination is still to leave it out initially and give a version
without done() six months to a year to mature. Not having done() can
make promises harder to debug in the short term, but adding done() is
trivial to do later. And given the lack of native promise
implementations to date there's no way for us to test the done()-less
design without trying it first.
--
jCore
Email : avi...@jcore.fr
Peersm : http://www.peersm.com
iAnonym : http://www.ianonym.com
node-Tor : https://www.github.com/Ayms/node-Tor
GitHub : https://www.github.com/Ayms
Web : www.jcore.fr
Extract Widget Mobile : www.extractwidget.com
BlimpMe! : www.blimpme.com
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
