On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Kevin Smith <zenparsing@gmail.com> wrote: > > FWIW I disagree with him -- I strongly suspect that by the time this >> were to all go down and a stable polyfill existed there'd already be too >> much then-demanding code in the wild. There probably already is. And at >> that point it's __proto__ all over again -- the standard will have no >> choice but to respect then and the problem cannot be fixed :-/ >> >> > Why not? If the `then` symbol is well-known (e.g. easily imported from > somewhere), then why can't libraries be upgraded to use it as an alias for > their `then` method? > I would love to see this, but best I can tell it can't be a straitforward polyfill. The necessary infrastructure has to settle, and what are Promises/A+ implementers supposed to do in the meantime? Unless a reasonably elegant solution can be found I suspect any es promises proposal will include support for thenables. I spent a lot of time thinking about it a few years back and couldn't find one, so I remain skeptical.Received on Monday, 22 April 2013 17:43:43 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:12 UTC