Easy to write yourself:
```js
function wait(ms) {
return function(v) {
return new Promise(resolve => setTimeout(() => resolve(v), ms));
};
}
```
Now you can do
```
Promise.resolve(42) . then(wait(1000)) . then( /* cb */);
```
and the 42 will get passed through the callback.
--Bob
On T
(Sorry for spam.) For reference in case someone searches for that topic in the
archive; see:
https://esdiscuss.org/topic/optional-chaining-aka-existential-operator-null-propagation
> Le 3 févr. 2016 à 20:28, John Lenz a écrit :
>
> Did this happen? I would like to see some progress here.
_
> Le 3 févr. 2016 à 20:56, John Lenz a écrit :
>
> Can you reference something as to why the more obvious operators are
> problematic?
>
> ?.
That one (that I've used) must work, with the simple lookahead I've put in the
lexical grammar, in order to continue to parse `x?.3:0` as today.
> ?
as pointed out offlist, the second line of my previous snippet was to
shortcut the following:
`new Promise(resolve => setTimeout(() => resolve("some value"), 1000));`
assuming `"some value"` was static. In case it's not the `new Promise(r =>
setTimeout(r, 1000)).then(()=>"some value");` is the wa
Here's a quick plug for my `prfun` library (https://github.com/cscott/prfun)
which implements this as `Promise.delay(1000)`.
API at:
https://github.com/cscott/prfun#promisedelaydynamic-value-int-ms--promise
You can also do `return somepromise.delay(100)` which resolves to the same
value as `samep
Chiming in just to underline that setTimeout and setInterval accepts extra
arguments since about ever so that the following is eventually all you need.
```js
new Promise(r => setTimeout(r, 1000));
new Promise(r => setTimeout(r, 1000, "some value"));
```
Best Regards
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:5
On 02/03/2016 11:56, John Lenz wrote:
Can you reference something as to why the more obvious operators are
problematic?
?.
?[]
?()
?:
Some of these have problems. For example, a?[]:b is already valid ECMAScript
syntax and does something else. There is an analogous but subtler problem for
I think this is a reasonable API, but ES is not the spec for it. ES does not
have a proper concept of an event loop, and definitely not a proper concept of
time. Note that setTimeout is not defined in ES, but instead in HTML:
https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#dom-windowtimers-settimeout
It might be
I think it would be super useful to be able to do something like:
Promise.after(1000).then( /* cb */ );
and have the promise resolve after 1000 milliseconds.
The promise would just resolve with the same value (in this case 1000) but
could easily delay resolving another value like so:
Promise.af
Can you reference something as to why the more obvious operators are
problematic?
?.
?[]
?()
?:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 7:19 AM, Claude Pache
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have prepared a strawman for the `?.` operator:
>
> https://github.com/claudepache/es-optional-chaining/
>
> If there is interest in t
Did this happen? I would like to see some progress here.
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:51 AM, Claude Pache
wrote:
>
> Le 13 janv. 2016 à 18:06, C. Scott Ananian a
> écrit :
>
> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 8:33 AM, Claude Pache
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I have thought about the right semantics (and the issue
11 matches
Mail list logo
