Me too. I find your points about why AP2 (recursive unwrapping of callback argument) is superior to AP3 (recursive unwrapping of callback result) persuasive. On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 7:09 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> > wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 12:37 AM, Sean Hogan <shogun70@westnet.com.au> > wrote: > >> Since the spec hasn't been updated, is there more info on how > >> `Future.accept()` will be fixed to support that code sample? > > > > My understanding is that the TC39-consensus is to keep the recursive > > unwrapping for return values of the then() callbacks. > > That is not yet consensus. It was rough agreement at the meeting, but > Brendan and I feel it's wrong. > > ~TJ > > -- Cheers, --MarkMReceived on Monday, 3 June 2013 14:13:57 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:13 UTC