> I have used this boilerplate so many times that I can type it without thinking.
I don't see much of error processing there. It's like programming without exception mechanism - you have to handle "err" return code in each line. Doubles the amount of code, in the end you can't see forest for the trees (I already can't see forest for the trees in the proposed optimal solution, but maybe it's only me) > My app currently has several thousand such calls. There are many very successful systems written completely (or to the large part) in assembly language. COSTS is the keyword. >Its design decisions were made with an eye towards simplicity and performance, not elegance or purity. Elegance SELLS. But again, if there's no problem, no point to discuss the solution. On Sunday, December 30, 2012 6:39:08 AM UTC-5, Bruno Jouhier wrote: > > FWIW the problem of implementing async/await semantics with a pure JS > library has been cracked: > http://smellegantcode.wordpress.com/2012/12/28/a-pure-library-approach-to-asyncawait-in-standard-javascript/ > > Unfortunately it involves a lot of extra grinding. So preprocessors and > fibers are still the best practical options. > -- Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
