{{ message }}
Promisify async wrapper#688
Closed
sam-github wants to merge 2 commits into
Closed
Conversation
Contributor
Contributor
I would prefer it over this situation: |
Contributor
|
Given that promises exemplify the future of async in ES6/7 javascript, we should be looking to the future as having those default returns on async functions IMO. (where it makes sense) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
maybe switch to typeof callback === 'function'?
Fishrock123
added
future
discuss
Contributor
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Alternate approach to promisification done by @bajtos in #173
I added more direct support for promise-like fulfill/reject in req_wrap, in the hopes it would be faster if support went deeper into C++.
The benchmarks are noisy on the machines I have access to, but it AFAICT, performance is no better or worse than node, for callback case. Also, no better or worse than #173 for the Promise case.
.
There are some open questions about whether direct use of a v8::Promise:Resolver object could be faster, but I'm blocked on that because I can't create one with any slots, so
Wrap()can't work on it.I'm also interested to look at bluebird, which at least one commentator claimed was faster than #173 when it promisifies fs. If so, it should be possible to improve the promise path in pure js.