- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Wed, 01 May 2013 17:06:48 +0200
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Cc: es-discuss <es-discuss@mozilla.org>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
* Jonas Sicking wrote: >Then there's of course the issue of what we should do with APIs that >combine several Futures into a single one. Like Future.every() etc. > >Similarly, there's also the issue of what to do with chaining. > >I'm tempted to say that if you create combined or dependent Futures, >you still only have the ability to cancel them through the original >CancelableFuture. And the "progress" of multiple "Futures" can only be observed through the individual "ProgressFuture" objects? I would expect the opposite. Similarily, I would expect to be able to mix "ProgressFuture" objects with other "Future" objects, and still be able to observe "progress" of the combination. And if I can do that, I would also expect that I can turn a single "Future" into a "ProgressFuture" in this sense, but then the whole "subclassing" idea kinda breaks down, why bother with that. And "cancelation" does not seem quite so different from "pro- gress" in this sense. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Wednesday, 1 May 2013 15:07:16 UTC