Reason why generators do not have references to themselves?

Bradley Meck bradley.meck at
Fri Jan 24 01:06:38 PST 2014

Taking note with async polyfills and syntax for a minute. I spent a fair
amount of time actually writing the spec of my intent/goal after getting
some thought and working things through in my head (varies slightly from
old 2011 await):

I can get really close with sweet.js (see gist), but as such I still have
to use new when invoking the generator function which feels dirty in my
Perhaps if I did some crazy code transforms to test if the generator
function was using await it would work. That would require me to wrap it
similar to how task.js and all the other libraries IRC bombarded me with. I
think it very strange that they all:

  1. make a promise that will be returned (finalPromise)
  2. call the generator and hook it up to the promise
  3. don't appear to have a clean way to make the generator continue
without resolving finalPromise and without forcing the generator to
      * bluebird's Promise.coroutine comes closeish but still needs to run
the generator to completion

It seems that every approach I am taking gets me slightly closer, but none
are a clean way for a generator to iterate itself without some hacky
argument passing and wrapping.

PS. Sorry about the horrifying sweet.js macro, but it is functional enough
in Chrome with experimental JS from what I tried out.

On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 2:18 AM, David Herman <dherman at> wrote:

> On Jan 23, 2014, at 4:49 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan at> wrote:
> > Domenic Denicola wrote:
> >> Task.js is still on "JavaScript1.8,"  and is not ES6-compatible. It
> won't work with modern browsers, or with Regenerator.
> >
> > Fork and fix, should be easy. I expect a PR would be accepted in due
> course. SpiderMonkey seems to have ES6 generator support somewhat there
> (thanks to Andy Wingo), should be all there soon enough.
> Working on it lately, actually. And using regenerator for the tests (\o/)!
> Also drastically simplifying the library since the customizable scheduler
> stuff, while kind of neat, is probably less compelling than a minimal
> library. Down to under 150 lines, unminified with comments, and still
> shrinking...
> Dave
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list