[ClojureScript] Re: When will the async/await feature in ES8 be introduced in ClojureScript?

[Thomas Heller]

A few notes about the current state of the proposal:

defn is not sufficient, fn itself would need to be support too. Example 
uses defn only.

Your generator examples only show yield in one direction. This is already 
pretty much possible with seqs and you can write seq->gen + gen->seq 
functions pretty easily for those. No work needs to be done for that. The 
part that is currently possible via seqs is "var x = yield;" since 
generators/yield are two-way.

Closure is changing how lanuage-in/out work. Output will be set as a 
feature-set specifying exactly which features should be compiled down or 
kept. At least that is what a recent commit [1] suggests. Input already 
pretty much detects the feature set when parsing, it is mostly used an 
optimization to skip certain work before parsing. I expect some changes 
here as well.

There would need to be a way for processing the CLJS generated code in :none. 
Since no transpilation is done for those usually (since its ES3) that would 
be an entirely new thing. Given that most developers will be running modern 
environments this might not be too critical overall though.



[1] 
https://github.com/google/closure-compiler/commit/7d00895022cb0704edd8beeabeabdcb065c365c5



On Friday, May 25, 2018 at 10:59:10 PM UTC+2, Shaun LeBron wrote:
>
> agreed that core.async is not relevant to this discussion.
>
> I suppose the main question is—how should ES6+ (ES Next) features be made 
> available to CLJS users.  Is the story going to be  "All of ES5 is 
> accessible from CLJS—but you must use an external JS file for ES Next 
> features"?
>
> (I added your transpile link to macros section. Also, I'd love to see 
> emitting ES Modules in the future, though I'm not sure of implications 
> there)
>
> On Friday, May 25, 2018 at 11:22:26 AM UTC-5, Thomas Heller wrote:
>>
>> Yes, core.async is not great for this but it was also not meant for this. 
>> The big abstraction there are channels or CSP. There are "zero" channels 
>> involved in your example so you could probably find a better abstraction to 
>> fit here.
>>
>> There are several different concurrency models and all of them have 
>> drawbacks. As I said before I'm for adding support for async/await and 
>> generators but core.async should not even be part of the argument IMHO. I'm 
>> not trying to convince anyone that core.async is the best solution ever. I 
>> remember vividly how desperately I wanted a proper Actor-like concurrency 
>> primitive when I came over from Erlang. I actually only understood the 
>> drawbacks of Actors after I learned about CSP.
>>
>> I made this example a while ago showing what Closure does when rewriting 
>> async/await to ES3.
>> https://gist.github.com/thheller/82ca9ef8a04b58aafa4624edbac383ac
>>
>> We could emit that JS code directly using a few macros. The only reason 
>> emitting the ES6+ code makes sense is due to tool support and maybe having 
>> slightly more compact code, which is probably not a factor after :advanced 
>> is done with it. We can already interop with all of it very easily, just 
>> writing equivalent code is not ideal.
>>
>> To be honest just adding support for async/await and generators alone 
>> doesn't make much sense to me. At that point we should probably look into 
>> emitting ES6+ESM directly instead and make proper use of all the features 
>> that has. Given that Closure support for ES6 is getting much better that 
>> might make sense at some point.
>>
>>
>> On Friday, May 25, 2018 at 4:45:22 PM UTC+2, Shaun LeBron wrote:
>>>
>>> Right!  The proposal mentions that go-blocks must check for a closed 
>>> channel at every step in order to exit early. So I'll revise the 
>>> title—core.async cannot stop *arbitrary* go-blocks.
>>>
>>> For example, with this staggered animation code, it's not immediately 
>>> clear to me how to exit after any step. In JS, it pulls the plug for free.
>>>
>>> (go
>>>   (dotimes [_ 3]
>>> (swap! game assoc :board cleared)
>>> (>> (swap! game assoc :board board)
>>> (>>   (swap! game assoc :board cleared)
>>>   (>>   (swap! game assoc :board collapsed))
>>>
>>>
>>> Anyone coming from the Unity game engine will recognize this feature as 
>>> the StopCoroutine function. Core.async does not have such a feature.  the 
>>> ergonomics matter!
>>>
>>> On Friday, May 25, 2018 at 3:28:49 AM UTC-5, Thomas Heller wrote:


> not quite! core.async doesn't allow you to cancel a go-block (to my 
> knowledge), which JS allows.  I added a section on this:
>
>
> https://beta.observablehq.com/@shaunlebron/proposal-generators-and-async-functions-in-clojurescript#coreasync
>
>
 This is incorrect. Closing a channel can be used to "end" a loop. In 
 addition it is possible to use alt! or alts! with an additional "control" 
 channel (or more) and "selecting" which channel to work on.



 (defn foo []
   (let [ch (async/chan)]
 (go (loop [i 100]
   (when 

[ClojureScript] Re: When will the async/await feature in ES8 be introduced in ClojureScript?

[Shaun LeBron]

agreed that core.async is not relevant to this discussion.

I suppose the main question is—how should ES6+ (ES Next) features be made 
available to CLJS users.  Is the story going to be  "All of ES5 is 
accessible from CLJS—but you must use an external JS file for ES Next 
features"?

(I added your transpile link to macros section. Also, I'd love to see 
emitting ES Modules in the future, though I'm not sure of implications 
there)

On Friday, May 25, 2018 at 11:22:26 AM UTC-5, Thomas Heller wrote:
>
> Yes, core.async is not great for this but it was also not meant for this. 
> The big abstraction there are channels or CSP. There are "zero" channels 
> involved in your example so you could probably find a better abstraction to 
> fit here.
>
> There are several different concurrency models and all of them have 
> drawbacks. As I said before I'm for adding support for async/await and 
> generators but core.async should not even be part of the argument IMHO. I'm 
> not trying to convince anyone that core.async is the best solution ever. I 
> remember vividly how desperately I wanted a proper Actor-like concurrency 
> primitive when I came over from Erlang. I actually only understood the 
> drawbacks of Actors after I learned about CSP.
>
> I made this example a while ago showing what Closure does when rewriting 
> async/await to ES3.
> https://gist.github.com/thheller/82ca9ef8a04b58aafa4624edbac383ac
>
> We could emit that JS code directly using a few macros. The only reason 
> emitting the ES6+ code makes sense is due to tool support and maybe having 
> slightly more compact code, which is probably not a factor after :advanced 
> is done with it. We can already interop with all of it very easily, just 
> writing equivalent code is not ideal.
>
> To be honest just adding support for async/await and generators alone 
> doesn't make much sense to me. At that point we should probably look into 
> emitting ES6+ESM directly instead and make proper use of all the features 
> that has. Given that Closure support for ES6 is getting much better that 
> might make sense at some point.
>
>
> On Friday, May 25, 2018 at 4:45:22 PM UTC+2, Shaun LeBron wrote:
>>
>> Right!  The proposal mentions that go-blocks must check for a closed 
>> channel at every step in order to exit early. So I'll revise the 
>> title—core.async cannot stop *arbitrary* go-blocks.
>>
>> For example, with this staggered animation code, it's not immediately 
>> clear to me how to exit after any step. In JS, it pulls the plug for free.
>>
>> (go
>>   (dotimes [_ 3]
>> (swap! game assoc :board cleared)
>> (> (swap! game assoc :board board)
>> (>   (swap! game assoc :board cleared)
>>   (>   (swap! game assoc :board collapsed))
>>
>>
>> Anyone coming from the Unity game engine will recognize this feature as 
>> the StopCoroutine function. Core.async does not have such a feature.  the 
>> ergonomics matter!
>>
>> On Friday, May 25, 2018 at 3:28:49 AM UTC-5, Thomas Heller wrote:
>>>
>>>
 not quite! core.async doesn't allow you to cancel a go-block (to my 
 knowledge), which JS allows.  I added a section on this:


 https://beta.observablehq.com/@shaunlebron/proposal-generators-and-async-functions-in-clojurescript#coreasync


>>> This is incorrect. Closing a channel can be used to "end" a loop. In 
>>> addition it is possible to use alt! or alts! with an additional "control" 
>>> channel (or more) and "selecting" which channel to work on.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> (defn foo []
>>>   (let [ch (async/chan)]
>>> (go (loop [i 100]
>>>   (when (pos? i)
>>> (>> (when (>! ch i)
>>>   (recur (dec i)
>>> (prn :loop-terminated))
>>> ch))
>>>
>>> (go (let [ch (foo)]
>>>   (prn (>>   (prn (>>   (async/close! ch)
>>>   (prn (>>
>>>
>>>  
>>> In addition the "loop" is dependent on the "ch" reference. If that gets 
>>> garbage collected the loop will be as well, similar to generators or 
>>> async/await.
>>>
>>

-- 
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ClojureScript" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to clojurescript+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to clojurescript@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.

[ClojureScript] Re: When will the async/await feature in ES8 be introduced in ClojureScript?

[Shaun LeBron]

thanks!  
added: 
https://beta.observablehq.com/@shaunlebron/proposal-generators-and-async-functions-in-clojurescript#macros

On Friday, May 25, 2018 at 1:24:07 PM UTC-5, Didier wrote:
>
> For example this blog post shows compatibility: 
> https://blog.jeaye.com/2017/09/30/clojurescript-promesa/
>
> And also gives a nice little macro so you can use similar syntax to async 
> and await.
>
> The biggest downside is that all the sugar is in a macro, and thus can't 
> rewrite across function boundaries. Though I think that's also true in JS.
>
>

-- 
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ClojureScript" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to clojurescript+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to clojurescript@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.

[ClojureScript] Re: When will the async/await feature in ES8 be introduced in ClojureScript?

[Didier]

For example this blog post shows compatibility: 
https://blog.jeaye.com/2017/09/30/clojurescript-promesa/

And also gives a nice little macro so you can use similar syntax to async and 
await.

The biggest downside is that all the sugar is in a macro, and thus can't 
rewrite across function boundaries. Though I think that's also true in JS.

-- 
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ClojureScript" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to clojurescript+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to clojurescript@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.

[ClojureScript] Re: When will the async/await feature in ES8 be introduced in ClojureScript?

[Thomas Heller]

Yes, core.async is not great for this but it was also not meant for this. 
The big abstraction there are channels or CSP. There are "zero" channels 
involved in your example so you could probably find a better abstraction to 
fit here.

There are several different concurrency models and all of them have 
drawbacks. As I said before I'm for adding support for async/await and 
generators but core.async should not even be part of the argument IMHO. I'm 
not trying to convince anyone that core.async is the best solution ever. I 
remember vividly how desperately I wanted a proper Actor-like concurrency 
primitive when I came over from Erlang. I actually only understood the 
drawbacks of Actors after I learned about CSP.

I made this example a while ago showing what Closure does when rewriting 
async/await to ES3.
https://gist.github.com/thheller/82ca9ef8a04b58aafa4624edbac383ac

We could emit that JS code directly using a few macros. The only reason 
emitting the ES6+ code makes sense is due to tool support and maybe having 
slightly more compact code, which is probably not a factor after :advanced 
is done with it. We can already interop with all of it very easily, just 
writing equivalent code is not ideal.

To be honest just adding support for async/await and generators alone 
doesn't make much sense to me. At that point we should probably look into 
emitting ES6+ESM directly instead and make proper use of all the features 
that has. Given that Closure support for ES6 is getting much better that 
might make sense at some point.


On Friday, May 25, 2018 at 4:45:22 PM UTC+2, Shaun LeBron wrote:
>
> Right!  The proposal mentions that go-blocks must check for a closed 
> channel at every step in order to exit early. So I'll revise the 
> title—core.async cannot stop *arbitrary* go-blocks.
>
> For example, with this staggered animation code, it's not immediately 
> clear to me how to exit after any step. In JS, it pulls the plug for free.
>
> (go
>   (dotimes [_ 3]
> (swap! game assoc :board cleared)
> ( (swap! game assoc :board board)
> (   (swap! game assoc :board cleared)
>   (   (swap! game assoc :board collapsed))
>
>
> Anyone coming from the Unity game engine will recognize this feature as 
> the StopCoroutine function. Core.async does not have such a feature.  the 
> ergonomics matter!
>
> On Friday, May 25, 2018 at 3:28:49 AM UTC-5, Thomas Heller wrote:
>>
>>
>>> not quite! core.async doesn't allow you to cancel a go-block (to my 
>>> knowledge), which JS allows.  I added a section on this:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://beta.observablehq.com/@shaunlebron/proposal-generators-and-async-functions-in-clojurescript#coreasync
>>>
>>>
>> This is incorrect. Closing a channel can be used to "end" a loop. In 
>> addition it is possible to use alt! or alts! with an additional "control" 
>> channel (or more) and "selecting" which channel to work on.
>>
>>
>>
>> (defn foo []
>>   (let [ch (async/chan)]
>> (go (loop [i 100]
>>   (when (pos? i)
>> (> (when (>! ch i)
>>   (recur (dec i)
>> (prn :loop-terminated))
>> ch))
>>
>> (go (let [ch (foo)]
>>   (prn (>   (prn (>   (async/close! ch)
>>   (prn (>
>>
>>  
>> In addition the "loop" is dependent on the "ch" reference. If that gets 
>> garbage collected the loop will be as well, similar to generators or 
>> async/await.
>>
>

-- 
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ClojureScript" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to clojurescript+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to clojurescript@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.

[ClojureScript] Re: When will the async/await feature in ES8 be introduced in ClojureScript?

[Shaun LeBron]

Right!  The proposal mentions that go-blocks must check for a closed 
channel at every step in order to exit early. So I'll revise the 
title—core.async cannot stop *arbitrary* go-blocks.

For example, with this staggered animation code, it's not immediately clear 
to me how to exit after any step. In JS, it pulls the plug for free.

(go
  (dotimes [_ 3]
(swap! game assoc :board cleared)
(
>
>> not quite! core.async doesn't allow you to cancel a go-block (to my 
>> knowledge), which JS allows.  I added a section on this:
>>
>>
>> https://beta.observablehq.com/@shaunlebron/proposal-generators-and-async-functions-in-clojurescript#coreasync
>>
>>
> This is incorrect. Closing a channel can be used to "end" a loop. In 
> addition it is possible to use alt! or alts! with an additional "control" 
> channel (or more) and "selecting" which channel to work on.
>
>
>
> (defn foo []
>   (let [ch (async/chan)]
> (go (loop [i 100]
>   (when (pos? i)
> ( (when (>! ch i)
>   (recur (dec i)
> (prn :loop-terminated))
> ch))
>
> (go (let [ch (foo)]
>   (prn (   (prn (   (async/close! ch)
>   (prn (
>
>  
> In addition the "loop" is dependent on the "ch" reference. If that gets 
> garbage collected the loop will be as well, similar to generators or 
> async/await.
>

-- 
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ClojureScript" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to clojurescript+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to clojurescript@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.

[ClojureScript] Re: When will the async/await feature in ES8 be introduced in ClojureScript?

[Didier]

I think compatibility shouldn't be an issue. Doesn't the async fn just return a 
promise? So you should be able to call an async fn from ClojureScript. 

-- 
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ClojureScript" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to clojurescript+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to clojurescript@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.

[ClojureScript] Re: When will the async/await feature in ES8 be introduced in ClojureScript?

[Thomas Heller]

>
>
> not quite! core.async doesn't allow you to cancel a go-block (to my 
> knowledge), which JS allows.  I added a section on this:
>
>
> https://beta.observablehq.com/@shaunlebron/proposal-generators-and-async-functions-in-clojurescript#coreasync
>
>
This is incorrect. Closing a channel can be used to "end" a loop. In 
addition it is possible to use alt! or alts! with an additional "control" 
channel (or more) and "selecting" which channel to work on.



(defn foo []
  (let [ch (async/chan)]
(go (loop [i 100]
  (when (pos? i)
(! ch i)
  (recur (dec i)
(prn :loop-terminated))
ch))

(go (let [ch (foo)]
  (prn (https://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.

[ClojureScript] Re: When will the async/await feature in ES8 be introduced in ClojureScript?

[Shogo Ohta]

FYI.

I'm working on a ClojureScript library named kitchen-async 
(https://github.com/athos/kitchen-async) in my spare time, and if you would 
like more syntactic support for Promises than promesa provides (ie. alet 
macro mentioned above), you might find it useful.

I know it's not totally an elegant solution for the issue, but it works 
enough (at least for me) in many practical cases.

Shogo

On Friday, May 25, 2018 at 11:01:10 AM UTC+9, Philos Kim wrote:
>
> I appreciate all the feedback for my question and came to know that the 
> implementation of the async/await feature in ClojureScript is not easy as I 
> expected.
>
> I agree that ClojureScript doesn't need to accept every new feature in JS 
> and I know that core.async is more powerful than the newly introduced 
> async/await feature in JS. However I would like to quote a Korean proverb: 
> "Don't use the knife for slautering a cow, when slautering a cock." A 
> simple use case needs a simple solution, not a magnificent and complex one.
>
> In JS world, the promise comes out to overcome the callback hell and the 
> async/await feature comes out to overcome the verbosity of the promise. Of 
> course, I know that the async/await feature is a syntactic sugar of the 
> promise, so can be used in the promise style in ClojureScript. But What I 
> want to avoid is that verbosity as in JS.
>
> Furthermore the async/await feature is now heavily used in the JS world, 
> especially in nodejs. So I want to use it in ClojureScript at least as JS 
> interop in the similiar way to the JS world, when I use the thrid-party 
> library written using the async/await feature.
>
>

-- 
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ClojureScript" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to clojurescript+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to clojurescript@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.

[ClojureScript] Re: When will the async/await feature in ES8 be introduced in ClojureScript?

[Philos Kim]

I appreciate all the feedback for my question and came to know that the 
implementation of the async/await feature in ClojureScript is not easy as I 
expected.

I agree that ClojureScript doesn't need to accept every new feature in JS 
and I know that core.async is more powerful than the newly introduced 
async/await feature in JS. However I would like to quote a Korean proverb: 
"Don't use the knife for slautering a cow, when slautering a cock." A 
simple use case needs a simple solution, not a magnificent and complex one.

In JS world, the promise comes out to overcome the callback hell and the 
async/await feature comes out to overcome the verbosity of the promise. Of 
course, I know that the async/await feature is a syntactic sugar of the 
promise, so can be used in the promise style in ClojureScript. But What I 
want to avoid is that verbosity as in JS.

Furthermore the async/await feature is now heavily used in the JS world, 
especially in nodejs. So I want to use it in ClojureScript at least as JS 
interop in the similiar way to the JS world, when I use the thrid-party 
library written using the async/await feature.

-- 
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ClojureScript" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to clojurescript+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to clojurescript@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.

[ClojureScript] Re: When will the async/await feature in ES8 be introduced in ClojureScript?

[Thomas Heller]

I'm generally in favor of "embracing the host" but both generators and 
async/await would probably require substantial rewrites of core parts of 
the compiler. It it not just about adding a small *** or *async* keyword 
somewhere. The compiler will generally emit anonymous functions at various 
places to ensure proper scoping and this can pretty easily break 
async/generator functions. Given that you'd emitting ES6+ anways however 
you could replace those with proper block-scoped lets though. Of course 
that is not a reason to not do it, just don't underestimate how much work 
this would be.

I certainly looks like the JS world is adopting async/await but given the 
rate of change in that ecosystem that might change again when the next 
thing comes along. Given that the React folks decided to implement a pretty 
substantial feature based on throwing promises I guess they are here to 
stay for a while though.

I do not think that this compares in any way to core.async however. It is a 
much more powerful abstraction which can do a lot of things async/await 
can't and anything that does can easily be achieved with core.async and a 
few helper functions/macros. Yes, core.async is not perfect either but 
someone could work on fixing the kinks.

I guess I agree that we should eventually support async/await + generators 
for the sake of full interop but not because of "issues" with core.async. 


On Thursday, May 24, 2018 at 6:58:38 PM UTC+2, Shaun LeBron wrote:
>
> thanks for posting this question.  I asked about it a few months ago on 
> slack and apparently it has come up a few times.  There is resistance (for 
> good reason), but here's a proposal I put together that might get 
> discussion going:
>
>
> https://beta.observablehq.com/@shaunlebron/proposal-generators-and-async-functions-in-clojurescript
>
> in summary, core.async doesn't solve all the problems, can be harder to 
> debug, and using the promise api directly can be unwieldy.  but there are 
> arguments against including the extra syntax.
>
> feedback appreciated!
>
>
> On Wednesday, May 23, 2018 at 11:44:06 PM UTC-5, Philos Kim wrote:
>>
>> I wonder when the async/await feature in ES8 will be introduced in 
>> ClojureScript.
>>
>> Of course, I know there is core.async in ClojureScript but I hope that 
>> the async/await feature in ES8 will be supported in ClojureScript as soon 
>> as possible.
>>
>> Does anyone know when it will be supported?
>>
>

-- 
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ClojureScript" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to clojurescript+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to clojurescript@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.

Re: [ClojureScript] Re: When will the async/await feature in ES8 be introduced in ClojureScript?

[Justin Lee]

I'm not the OP, but I'll explain why I personally avoid core.async and what
I do to get features that are roughly equivalent to async/await today.

My first issue with core.async is that you have to be very careful on the
producer-side to handle exceptions properly.  If you drop an exception, at
best you'll get a stack-trace dumped to the console that often won't have a
single line that traces back to your code.  Instead, you'll get a pile of
generated library code that you have no experience with.  I ran into this
when JSON.parse throws an exception inside cljs-http, which in my opinion
is just the kind of run-of-the-mill exception that should be easy to debug
(but isn't).

The second issue is that there are still a number of bugs with core.async
surrounding exception handling.  As I was trying to fix the above issues, I
ran into one of them.  https://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/ASYNC-73

In short, my basic problem with core.async is that it adds a lot of
complexity (and size) to your code, which I'd rather avoid if there are
better alternatives.

The three non-callback ways of dealing with async code in javascript are
(1) promises, (2) generators, (3) async/await.  The first two are es6.  The
last is es-2017.  Because these are now built into the language and are
widely relied upon, the tooling support (e.g. browser and node) are
excellent and all the corner cases have been worked out.

Async/await is sugar that you put on top of generators.  The feel of
async/await is exactly like go-blocks, where "async" is "go" and "await" is
"http://facebook.github.io/regenerator/

So far, though, I've found that async/await is mostly useful in javascript
because of the fact that you have side-effecting statements and complex
syntax where it is convenient to be able to throw an "await" without
refactoring your code.  In clojurescript, you tend to write code in a
non-side-effecting expressions, so I don't find that I need something that
general.

For simple things, I find that just relying on plain promises (using the
promesa library) is enough.  You can do this:

(-> (promise-returning-call)
(then (fn [response] ...))
(catch (fn [error] ...)))

This is simple, it is very close to the host language, and there are no
corner cases that I know of to surprise you.

Sometimes you need to thread the results of an earlier async call to later
calls, which can be clumsy.  I think async/await was largely driven by
solving this problem, but I don't think you really need that generality in
this language.  I have found that as long as you write "clojurescripty"
code, the alet macro from the promesa library is all you need.

(alet [a (get-a)
   b (get-b a)
   c (get-c a b)]
  (do-something c))

Setting all that aside, the clear advantage of being able to target
async/await (or maybe just generators) is that you get the native
implementation and don't have to do all of this code manipulation in user
space.  The tooling is going to be better, the code will be smaller, and
the edge cases are going to be handled.  Maybe you could even write a
core.async fork without all of the IOC helpers (i.e. just translate
directly to async/await).

By the way, I hope I'm not coming off as being critical of the core.async
authors.  This stuff is very hard to get right and not everyone is going to
have the same design requirements.



On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 6:25 AM Nikita Dudnik  wrote:

> Sorry for answering with a question but I have to second Andrew. What's
> wrong with core.async and more importantly how'd you implement async/await
> in clojurescript in terms of syntax?
>
> -
> Nik
>
>
> On Thursday, May 24, 2018 at 6:44:06 AM UTC+2, Philos Kim wrote:
>>
>> I wonder when the async/await feature in ES8 will be introduced in
>> ClojureScript.
>>
>> Of course, I know there is core.async in ClojureScript but I hope that
>> the async/await feature in ES8 will be supported in ClojureScript as soon
>> as possible.
>>
>> Does anyone know when it will be supported?
>>
> --
> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with
> your first post.
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "ClojureScript" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to clojurescript+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to clojurescript@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.
>

-- 
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ClojureScript" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to clojurescript+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to clojurescript@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.

[ClojureScript] Re: When will the async/await feature in ES8 be introduced in ClojureScript?

[Shaun LeBron]

thanks for posting this question.  I asked about it a few months ago on 
slack and apparently it has come up a few times.  There is resistance (for 
good reason), but here's a proposal I put together that might get 
discussion going:

https://beta.observablehq.com/@shaunlebron/proposal-generators-and-async-functions-in-clojurescript

in summary, core.async doesn't solve all the problems, can be harder to 
debug, and using the promise api directly can be unwieldy.  but there are 
arguments against including the extra syntax.

feedback appreciated!


On Wednesday, May 23, 2018 at 11:44:06 PM UTC-5, Philos Kim wrote:
>
> I wonder when the async/await feature in ES8 will be introduced in 
> ClojureScript.
>
> Of course, I know there is core.async in ClojureScript but I hope that the 
> async/await feature in ES8 will be supported in ClojureScript as soon as 
> possible.
>
> Does anyone know when it will be supported?
>

-- 
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ClojureScript" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to clojurescript+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to clojurescript@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.

[ClojureScript] Re: When will the async/await feature in ES8 be introduced in ClojureScript?

[Nikita Dudnik]

Sorry for answering with a question but I have to second Andrew. What's 
wrong with core.async and more importantly how'd you implement async/await 
in clojurescript in terms of syntax?

-
Nik 

On Thursday, May 24, 2018 at 6:44:06 AM UTC+2, Philos Kim wrote:
>
> I wonder when the async/await feature in ES8 will be introduced in 
> ClojureScript.
>
> Of course, I know there is core.async in ClojureScript but I hope that the 
> async/await feature in ES8 will be supported in ClojureScript as soon as 
> possible.
>
> Does anyone know when it will be supported?
>

-- 
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ClojureScript" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to clojurescript+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to clojurescript@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.