- From: Ron Buckton <rbuckton@chronicles.org>
- Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 20:39:17 +0000
- To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: Mark Miller <erights@gmail.com>, David Sheets <kosmo.zb@gmail.com>, "Mark S. Miller" <erights@google.com>, es-discuss <es-discuss@mozilla.org>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, David Bruant <bruant.d@gmail.com>, Dean Tribble <tribble@e-dean.com>
> -----Original Message----- > From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 1:20 PM > To: Ron Buckton > Cc: Mark Miller; David Sheets; Mark S. Miller; es-discuss; public-script- > coord@w3.org; David Bruant; Dean Tribble > Subject: Re: A Challenge Problem for Promise Designers > > > * Added Future.from to perform explicit assimilation (with only one > > level of unwrap, as with Future#then) > > Like I said, Domenic says that recursive assimilation is useful, and I'm inclined > to believe him, as he has a lot more experience in getting arbitrary thenables > to play nicely together than I do. ^_^ I'll tinker with it and run some tests. > > * Added Future.isFuture to test for native Futures > > For the purpose of library code, you don't need this - just use "x instanceof > Future". Future.isFuture is only useful for the language to define, so that it > can tell something is a Future cross-frame. The intent is to eventually have a rough polyfill for ES5 and earlier, so if Future.isFuture becomes part of the spec this would likely match using some kind of pseudo-symbol polyfill. > > ~TJ Ron
Received on Monday, 29 April 2013 20:40:04 UTC