Re: Futures

Le 22/04/2013 14:26, Kevin Smith a écrit :
>     Thenable futures are uglier than branded futures, but also the only
>     way to remain compatible with the various libraries that are out there
>     today, which is something many people value.
> What about using a symbol for the `then` protocol?  Libraries can be 
> upgraded to use the symbol as an alias for `then`.  It set up a 
> dependency on ES6, of course...
And it doesn't address the compatibility problem people want to address.
I personally wonder whether the compatibility with existing libraries is 
so important. It should be pretty easy to wrap a native future into a 
library future (aren't native futures already Promise/A+ compatible?) 
and vice versa. Why isn't it enough to help with compatibility with 

Eventually, what will be the point of a promise library if there is 
native support?


Received on Monday, 22 April 2013 12:38:21 UTC