Proposal: `await [p1, p2]` (equivalent to `await Promise.all([p1, p2])`)
olalonde at gmail.com
Wed Oct 26 08:03:37 UTC 2016
I didn't realize `await` could be used on non-`Promise`s, never mind. I
wonder why that is, seems strange. Maybe so that async functions could be
more easily swapped out with sync ones in code? I do think `Promise.all`
should deserve special treatment because it is so common, unlike
Promise.race (who uses that seriously?) and future combinators. But I'm not
sure it is worth introducing new syntax for.
On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 12:33 AM, Jordan Harband <ljharb at gmail.com> wrote:
> Your suggestion would preclude having a promise for an array (exactly what
> `Promise.all` returns).
> If you want `await` syntax for `Promise.all`, you'd need different syntax
> for it - and then, what about `Promise.race`? What about other future
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 12:25 AM, Olivier Lalonde <olalonde at gmail.com>
>> I don't think so, what do you mean?
>> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 12:22 AM, Raul-Sebastian Mihăilă <
>> raul.mihaila at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Then Promise.resolve([p1, p2]) should be like Promise.all([p1, p2]) ?
>>> es-discuss mailing list
>>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
>> - Oli
>> Oli Lalonde
>> http://www.syskall.com <-- connect with me!
>> es-discuss mailing list
>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
http://www.syskall.com <-- connect with me!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss