This change is not backwards-compatible. Note that the semantics of the
following example would change:
```js
(async () => {
const result = await [new Promise(resolve => {
setTimeout(resolve, 1000);
})];
})();
```
Now, what should `result` contain?
`await` can already be used on non-`Promise`s. In case of arrays, the
completion value will just be the same array of `Promise`s, *not* an array of
their corresponding completion values.
On Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:11:36 AM CEST Olivier Lalonde wrote:
> I have no idea if this has been discussed already but I thought it'd be
> nice to have the following syntax sugar for async/await.
>
> The idea would be that any array that follows `await` would be wrapped into
> a Promise.all() call. For example, `await [p1,p2]` would be the equivalent
> of `await Promise.all([p1,p2])`.
>
> It would make some more complex expressions easier to read:
>
> ```
> const downloads = await Promise.all(regs.map(reg => client.get(reg.url, {
> responseType: 'arraybuffer',
> })))
> ```
>
> vs
>
> ```
> const downloads = await regs.map(reg => client.get(reg.url, {
> responseType: 'arraybuffer',
> }))
> ```
>
> In many async/await code bases, it might remove the last use case for
> typing `Promise` directly.
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
