Re: Futures

On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 1:37 PM, David Bruant <> wrote:
> 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 libraries?

They are compatible because of how futures make use of then.


Received on Monday, 22 April 2013 13:13:25 UTC