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

Re: Deprecating Future's .then()

From: Mark S. Miller <erights@google.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 07:13:26 -0700
Message-ID: <CABHxS9hZxmAKPtJQXiTWxqEiyKWbGQufKB6u=0pCjSe8hsurQw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Sean Hogan <shogun70@westnet.com.au>, "www-dom@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
Me too. I find your points about why AP2 (recursive unwrapping of callback
argument) is superior to AP3 (recursive unwrapping of callback
result) persuasive.


On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 7:09 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 12:37 AM, Sean Hogan <shogun70@westnet.com.au>
> wrote:
> >> Since the spec hasn't been updated, is there more info on how
> >> `Future.accept()` will be fixed to support that code sample?
> >
> > My understanding is that the TC39-consensus is to keep the recursive
> > unwrapping for return values of the then() callbacks.
>
> That is not yet consensus.  It was rough agreement at the meeting, but
> Brendan and I feel it's wrong.
>
> ~TJ
>
>


-- 
    Cheers,
    --MarkM
Received on Monday, 3 June 2013 14:13:57 UTC

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