Async functions not friendly to promise extensions

[medikoo]

> You seem to misunderstand what async functions do to be async, Your
function has the same product as the following:

> new Promise((acc, rej) => acc(extendedPromise))

Yes, I totally understand that, and it's clear to me that it's that way. In
my post I question that design, as it seems to me that way nicer would be if
it's as follows:

If (isThenable(result)) return result;
else return new Promise((resolve, reject) => resolve(result));

Or if above seems too liberal, then at least:

if (isPromise(result)) return new result.constructor((resolve, reject) =>
resolve(result));
else return new Promise((resolve, reject) => resolve(result));

> By no means do async functions use the returned values as their way of
> determining what type of promise 
they are: that'd break when using multiple returns with different types.

> I hope this explains it a bit for you.

Sorry, but it didn't explain much. What to you mean by "that'd break when
using multiple returns with different types" ? Can you throw some simple
example?





--
View this message in context: http://mozilla.6506.n7.nabble.com/Async-functions-not-friendly-to-promise-extensions-tp364921p364924.html
Sent from the Mozilla - ECMAScript 4 discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.