- From: Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:57:42 -0700
- To: whatwg/fetch <fetch@noreply.github.com>
Received on Thursday, 26 March 2015 18:58:08 UTC
Another alternative: ```js let abortFetch; let p = new Promise((resolve, reject) => { abortFetch = reject; }); fetch(url, { abort: p }).then(success, failure); // on error abortFetch(); ``` That would make the activity on fetch dependent on a previous promise in a similar fashion (but more intimate) to this: ```js promiseYieldingThing().then(result => fetch(url)).then(success, failure); ``` I don't like the implicit nature of what @jakearchibald suggests here. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/issues/27#issuecomment-86670398
Received on Thursday, 26 March 2015 18:58:08 UTC