Re: [fetch] Aborting a fetch (#27)

@getify I appeal to you, once again, to filter out the repetition and verbosity of your posts *before* posting, rather than all readers having to do it per read. I ask not only for others' benefit, this will be boost the signal of the point you're trying to make.

> If there's a … subclass … where cancelation is a … control capability, it should be exposed in … the same way as resolve and reject

`resolve` and `reject` are internal to the promise. What we're talking about here is a way to let an observer signal disinterest in the result, and let a promise react to all observers becoming disinterested.

> making a … promise reference capable of canceling the promise violates … that they are externally immutable once created

Yes, that would be a specific and intentional difference between cancellable promises and regular ones. I understand in great detail that you don't like that, but can you (briefly and with evidence/example) show the problems this creates?

> If I vend a promise and hand … it to 3 different parties … one can unilaterally call `abort(..)` on it, and that affects my internal observation of the promise

If you don't want to vend a cancellable promise don't vend a cancellable promise.

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/issues/27#issuecomment-86961891