- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2013 01:55:27 +0200
- To: Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.com>
- Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "Mark S. Miller" <erights@google.com>, Douglas Crockford <douglas@crockford.com>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, Norbert Lindenberg <w3@norbertlindenberg.com>, Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>, es-discuss <es-discuss@mozilla.org>
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.com> wrote: > Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> >> This group is public-script-coord, which we're already having the >> discussion on, so... success! > > THE SYSTEM IS WORKING! > > Sorry for catch-up replies, I will try to stifle. ;-) For what it's worth, I'd love to see TC39 take on Promises. If they are called "Future" or not matters less. I pushed for DOMEvents to be dropped from Futures with one of the goals being to make them less DOM dependent and more possible to spec in TC39 (I had other more important goals too, I'm not particularly a fan of DOM Events). In particular, I'd love to get TC39 to look over the "is-a-future" issue. I'm pretty worried about the current solution which makes "then" a magic property name. It's less bad than "__proto__" is, but not by a lot. However I also think it's critical that we get promises/Futures soon. We've been writing specs for a long time which suffers from the lack of them. We're probably permanently adding APIs to the web platform on a monthly basis which would be significantly improved if we used promises. Waiting until ES7 is simply not an option. I don't have any solutions to propose. But I'd be happy to see Futures removed from the DOM spec once there is a TC39 draft that we can point to and start implementing. / Jonas
Received on Saturday, 20 April 2013 23:56:25 UTC