This repository has been archived by the owner on Aug 29, 2021. It is now read-only.
Promisify up through source text module record's Evaluate() #15
Conversation
This file contains 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
It was always pretty silly to use Completion() here, so in the new version, let's not do that.
Now InnerModuleEvaluation returns a promise for the index, instead of the index itself. It also awaits recursive invocations of itself, as well as the invocation of ModuleExecution. This implements variant A (sequential, blocking execution) since it is easier to write spec text for; we can in the future easily (?) convert to variant B by making local modifications to InnerModuleEvaluation's child-evaluation loop.
Now all Source Text Module Records' Evaluate() concrete methods return promises, bubbling up the async-ness from InnerModuleEvaluation.
|
landed in d4d988d...caba498 |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
See individual commit messages.
This has one big problem; see #18 for that. I think we might want to merge this with that large caveat, as the intention is clear, and fix it afterward. Suggestions and reviews welcome.