Codefined, just out of curiousity, do you have anything to do with this proposal that got announced today <https://github.com/tc39/proposals/pull/41>? Or is it just a coincidence? :)
On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 3:07 PM Dean Tribble <trib...@e-dean.com> wrote: > Should `callee()` be asynchronous here? To my mind, no, it shouldn't. > Every single line here is synchronous, so the function itself should surely > be synchronous. Shouldn't functions that may not have `await` in them, but > instead that are actually asynchronous and hence use the `async return` > keyword be the ones we define with `async`? > > > In the Javascript (and Midori) model, concurrent execution of multiple > activities is achieved by breaking those activities up into coarse-grained, > application-defined "turns" (or "jobs") and interleaving those. An async > boundary is where the current turn could end, and the turns for other > concurrent activities might run, changing the state before the current > activity proceeds. > > Therefore, callee must be async, because that declares that there could > be a turn boundary within it, and thus, the rest of the state of the > program could change as a result of the call. The caller of callee *must > *ensure that it's invariants are correct before allowing other code to > interleave with it. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
