Open YarnSphere opened 9 years ago
Glad you're enjoying Operative :)
Throwing inside of an operative method should probably already result in a rejected promise but somehow I missed that, so thanks for bringing it up! I'll try to get this into 0.4.0rc2 (and formally 0.4.0) which is currently being worked on.
Actually, thinking about this more...
I'm not sure of the correct semantics here. Plus I think there needs to be more thought given to what happens in the non-promise case. There is always an implicit promise, but if people aren't listening for a rejection then an error might not be noticed at all... which is definitely bad.
Out of curiosity, what is your use case? Is it the case that your operative-method's logic throws legitimate errors? If so, can you just formally reject() it internally?
I'm not sure about the semantics either. After making the request I also thought a bit more about it and wasn't so sure whether it should be implemented.
In my case, I was trying to write functions that could be used both inside or outside a web worker. Raising exceptions is common practise when writing a regular function - I'd like to be able to also see the raised exception if the function is running inside a worker. Using deferred.reject
makes no sense in a non-worker environment.
Hi! First of all, I've only been using this library for a few days and I already find it awesome, so: thank you for creating it, your work is definitely appreciated! My issue can probably be considered a request: I'm not certain that this is possible (I believe it should be), since I haven't looked into the source. What I would like to do is the following:
Is this possible? Is this not a good idea? Thank you for your time and for your work!