Created
November 24, 2012 15:47
-
-
Save JamesMGreene/4140215 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Using Q, is this the best way to pass the results of two sequenced promises to the subsequent `then`/`spread` clause?
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
'use strict'; | |
var Q = require('q'); | |
var cmd = new require('commander').Command(); | |
var client = new require('myAwesomeApi').Client(); | |
var getUsername = function(done) { | |
var username; | |
cmd.prompt('Username: ', function(name) { | |
if (!name) { | |
done(new Error('You must provide a username!')); | |
} | |
else { | |
done(null, username); | |
} | |
}); | |
}; | |
var getPassword = function(done) { | |
cmd.password('Password: ', '*', function(pass) { | |
if (!pass) { | |
done(new Error('You must provide a password!')); | |
} | |
else { | |
process.stdin.destroy(); | |
done(null, pass); | |
} | |
}); | |
}; | |
Q.napply(getUsername, null, []).then(function(username) { | |
return Q.napply(getPassword, null, []).then(function(password) { | |
return Q.resolve([username, password]); | |
}); | |
}).spread(function(username, password) { | |
return Q.napply(client.login, client, [username, password]); | |
}) |
No, fail
shouldn't go before done
; in that case: it does change the semantics.
.then(f1, r1, p1).fail(f2).end()
should be replaced with .then(f1, r1, p1).fail(f2).done()
or .then(f1, r2, p1).done(undefined, f2)
. I often cap with an empty .done()
; I sometimes use .done(f)
or sometimes .done(f, r)
.
Also: if you're writing only for Node you can use .catch
instead of .fail
(and .finally
instead of .fin
).
Cool, I'll go with catch
(definitely prefer its obviously semantic name over fail
) and an empty done
. Thanks again!
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
FWIW, using
.fail(...).done(...);
feels very unnatural to me as thedone
handler is receiving a resolved promise value from my previousthen
but thefail
handler is in the middle of the two, creating a mentally diverted/disjoint flow. Recommendations to fix that?Where do you normally put your
fail
handler? Or, do you instead use thedone
handler's rejection argument (2nd function)? Would thedone
handler's rejection function receive failures from any point in the promise chain likefail
does? I'm guessing not.