You're quite right, which demonstrates the lack of necessity for a top-level
await (FYI, I find the inconsistency irritating but understandable), so I still
maintain this is not a _required_ use for an IIAFE - there is no reason to
create an async function to invoke another async function; one can simply
invoke it, and if the result/completion is required, use it's ,then()
member....but there's no need/advantage to wrapping such an invocation in an
IIAFE, right?
On 20 December 2015 13:40:30 -00:00, Forbes Lindesay <for...@lindesay.co.uk>
wrote:
> Promises are eager. That is, they do the work and resolve whether you await
> them or not. If you want to handle exceptions, you need to call .then and
> provide an error handler, but other than that it's totally ok to not bother
> waiting for a promise.
>
>
> On 19 Dec 2015, at 22:02, Mat At Bread <<br...@mailed.me.uk>> wrote:
>
>
> > Which is what I said, I hope. Use the .then for top-level invitation.
> > Dimitry's example wouldn't resolve the Promise
> >
> > On 19 December 2015 9:24:04 pm Fabrício Matté <<ultco...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > > @bread I see you are referencing Dmitry's sample, but why do you say it
> > > won't work? AFAIK async functions return promises, so you don't
> > > necessarily need a top-level `await`. I believe this (extremely ugly)
> > > sample should work:
> > >
> > > ```js
> > > function f(cb) {
> > >
> > > (async function() {
> > > // await here
> > > })().then(v => cb(null, v), cb);
> > > }
> > > ```
> > >
> > > /fm
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 7:11 PM, <<br...@mailed.me.uk>> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > That’s not going to work. The correct form still requires an (illegal)
> > > > top-level await:
> > > >
> > > > await (async function() {
> > > > // await here
> > > > })();
> > > >
> > > > The easiest way to spawn a top-level async function is:
> > > >
> > > > here.then(function(result){},function(error){}) ;
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 19 December 2015 20:14:44 -00:00, Dmitry Soshnikov
> > > > <<dmitry.soshni...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Saturday, December 19, 2015, Šime Vidas <<sime.vi...@gmail.com>>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > With block statements + let/const, IIFEs are no longer needed to
> > > > > > emulate block-scoped variables. That got me thinking, are there
> > > > > > other uses of IIFEs, or are they no longer needed?
> > > > > > I’ve checked my code and found instances of this pattern:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > var foo = (function () {
> > > > > > var a, b, c; // helper variables
> > > > > > // some computation
> > > > > > return /* final value of foo */;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > }());
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Btw, there is a "do expression" proposal (stage 0) [1] for this
> > > > > > type of pattern.
> > > > > > Anything else?
> > > > > >
> > > > > FWIW, one of the still valid use cases is async IIFE, to spawn an
> > > > > async code (since there's no yet top-level async/await)
> > > > >
> > > > > (async function() {
> > > > > // await here
> > > > > })();
> > > > >
> > > > > Dmitry
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > es-discuss mailing list
> > > > <es-discuss@mozilla.org>
> > > >
> > > > <https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > es-discuss mailing list
> >
> > <es-discuss@mozilla.org>
> >
> > <https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss>
> >
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
