Re: [whatwg/streams] Reference promise spec definitions (#554)

ricea commented on this pull request.

My feeling is that there's no reasonable way to use the definition of promise-calling as it stands.

I will defer on the upon-fulfillment issue to @domenic's  superior knowledge.

I've run the changed file through bikeshed and checked that the links work. Apart from the two issues I called out, it looks fine. The minor textual changes to match the phrasing from the Promises Guide also look fine.

> @@ -2752,10 +2752,10 @@ nothrow>WritableStreamUpdateBackpressure ( <var>stream</var>, <var>backpressure<
   1. Let _writer_ be _stream_.[[writer]].
   1. If _writer_ is *undefined*, return.
   1. If _backpressure_ is *true*,
-    1. Set _writer_.[[readyPromise]] to a new promise.
+    1. Set _writer_.[[readyPromise]] to <a>a new promise<a>.

Second \<a> should be \</a>

> @@ -857,8 +857,8 @@ nothrow>ReadableStreamAddReadIntoRequest ( <var>stream</var> )</h4>
 
 <emu-alg>
   1. Set _stream_.[[disturbed]] to *true*.
-  1. If _stream_.[[state]] is `"closed"`, return a new promise resolved with *undefined*.
-  1. If _stream_.[[state]] is `"errored"`, return a new promise rejected with _stream_.[[storedError]].
+  1. If _stream_.[[state]] is `"closed"`, return <a>a promise resolved with</a> *undefined*.
+  1. If _stream_.[[state]] is `"errored"`, return <a>a promise rejected with</a> _stream_.[[storedError]].

"a promise rejected with" seems to be inconsistently linked. I counted 34 places where it is not linked. Am I missing the reason for this?

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/streams/pull/554#pullrequestreview-5428645