[strawman] Symbol.thenable proposal

[Jordan Harband]

This proposal is that Symbol.thenable can be false, or true (which is a
no-op). A future proposal could make it *also* be a string or symbol
(IsPropertyKey), and then change the method name.

In other words, I don't think there's a conflict, and I think that changing
the method name could and should be a followon proposal.

On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 1:25 PM, Gus Caplan <me at gus.host> wrote:

> It's a fair point, i assume the usage would be like if the property
> exists then ignore thenable behaviour and if it is falsy then none of
> any of this behaviour would occur, so a Module Namespace Object could
> have like [whateverSymbolName]: null, if thats sorta what you are
> proposing?
>
> On 2018-04-14 13:11:34, Michael Theriot wrote:
> > A hypothetical proposal addressing that would intersect with this.
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 2:01 PM, <me at gus.host <mailto:me at gus.host>>
> wrote:
> >
> >     I don't understand why you would expect that, can you explain a bit
> >     more?
> >
> >     -Gus
> >
> >     On 14 Apr 2018 10:53, Michael Theriot <michael.lee.theriot at gmail.com
> >     <mailto:michael.lee.theriot at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >         Currently 'then' is effectively a reserved key and I'd expect
> >         any extension that allows the language to ignore it likewise
> >         include a means of changing the key entirely.
> >
> >         On Apr 12, 2018, at 9:33 PM, Gus Caplan <me at gus.host
> >         <mailto:me at gus.host>> wrote:
> >
> >             Hello all,
> >
> >             In an effort to curtail the interesting behavior of
> >             Promise.resolve (especially
> >             with regard to dynamic import), I have created a proposal
> >             for a well-known
> >             symbol which will allow an object to not be treated as a
> >             "thenable."
> >
> >             I am privy to the current protocol proposal which might be a
> >             better fit for
> >             this, but due to dynamic import already being stage 3, I
> >             don't feel we should
> >             wait for it to come to fruition.
> >
> >             Comments and suggestions are of course quite welcome at the
> >             repo [1].
> >
> >             Thanks,
> >             -Gus
> >
> >             [1]: https://github.com/devsnek/proposal-symbol-thenable
> >             <https://github.com/devsnek/proposal-symbol-thenable>
> >
> >             _______________________________________________
> >             es-discuss mailing list
> >             es-discuss at mozilla.org <mailto:es-discuss at mozilla.org>
> >             https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
> >             <https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20180414/f65c0ad1/attachment.html>