Re: A Challenge Problem for Promise Designers (was: Re: Futures)

2013/4/26 Kevin Smith <>

> What exactly is the controversy here?
> I think we all agree with the semantics of "then" as specified in
> Promises/A+.  (If not, then we have a really big problem!)

Promise/A+ does not prohibit promises for promises. But in practice the
problem is recognizing what is a promise. There are two options:

1) Recognize all thenables as promises
2) Recognize only the promises from your own library

Many implementations go with (1), including ODMFuture. Since it doesn't
distinguish between promises and thenables, then() flattens all of them.


Received on Friday, 26 April 2013 13:44:33 UTC