Domenic Denicola wrote:
Seeing as how I just produced a completely redundant message by
failing to read the other responses before firing off my own, let me
try to redeem myself with some more-original content.
(Nice post!)
It’s also important to realize that streams are not the only
asynchr
Seeing as how I just produced a completely redundant message by failing to read
the other responses before firing off my own, let me try to redeem myself with
some more-original content.
It’s also important to realize that streams are not the only
asynchronous-plural primitive out there. My fav
The same argument also implies that arrays are more powerful than scalar
values, and we should e.g. never use a number when we could instead just use a
single-element array with a number.
From: es-discuss [mailto:es-discuss-boun...@mozilla.org] On Behalf Of Boopathi
Rajaa
Sent: Saturday, March
Synchronously, we have both normal (synchronous) function calls and iteration
over a sequence of values (via `for-of` and iterators). It makes sense that we
also should have two abstractions for asynchronous interaction.
> On 28 Mar 2015, at 13:14, Boopathi Rajaa wrote:
>
> I feel this must ha
Maybe the confusion stems from how Promises were used in ES5? ES5 doesn't
support generators, so people ended up adding a sort of psuedo-generator
API to their promise APIs, but in reality the concepts solve different
problems? FYI, python seems to use promises and event streams together in
its a
On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Boopathi Rajaa wrote:
> Why do we have both?
Why do we have both values and arrays, not just the latter?
--
https://annevankesteren.nl/
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listi
I feel this must have already been discussed but couldn't find any
discussion threads, just trying to understand them better.
The basic doubt is that I feel promises are more like streams, and that
streams are much more powerful than promises. With a promise you have a
value or an exception, and w
I propose that all the calls to any async function will be implicit
(without the need of the await keyword). And precede it with a nowait only
when you want a promise.
See this snipped proposal:
https://gist.github.com/jbaylina/692d4e43329c8c0d22dd
This way, the code will not have the async clut
FWIW: I have written down my understanding of the ES6 iteration protocol
(shaped by discussions I had on this mailing list).
https://gist.github.com/rauschma/73e5f86a595b7709f39e
--
Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
a...@rauschma.de
rauschma.de
___
es-discuss m
9 matches
Mail list logo
