W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > April to June 2013

RE: A Challenge Problem for Promise Designers (was: Re: Futures)

From: Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 17:03:24 +0000
To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, David Sheets <kosmo.zb@gmail.com>
CC: "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, es-discuss <es-discuss@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <B4AE8F4E86E26C47AC407D49872F6F9F7EF5C5A5@BY2PRD0510MB354.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
From: Tab Atkins Jr. [jackalmage@gmail.com]

> The need for this will decrease now that DOM Futures exist, and libraries switch to using those (or a subclass of them) rather than rolling bespoke promises.

Last I heard, jQuery has committed to never switching their promises implementation to one that works, for backward compatibility reasons. Rick might know more about if thinking has changed recently, though.

Even then, it's very naive to expect all code will be upgraded to subclass a DOM API.
Received on Friday, 26 April 2013 17:03:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:37:49 UTC