I'm mostly using programming languages like Scala and JavaScript. I'm trying to understand the similarities and differences in how async reactive programming is used in both languages. Can you help me?
I'm not taking any particular Js Promise
framework because it seems many implement the similar specifications (like Promise/A). I've only used Q so far.
It seems that in Javascript we call a Deferred
the object we resolve to complete a Promise
. In Scala, it seems the Promise
is the object you resolve to get a Future
monad.
Can someone tell me if this is right? Is there any good reason for a different usage of the term Promise
between Js and Scala?
Also, in Scala we usually chain Future
monads with further computations using operators like map
and flatMap
(also called bind
in Haskell). What is the equivalent of these in Js?
I may be wrong but it appears to me that in Js the then
on a Promise
kind of handle both map
and flatMap
operators right? If so, is it possible to obtain a promise of promise of result
in Js? Like we can get a Future[Future[Result]]
in Scala (which can be flattened to a Future[Result]
anyway).
Is Js Promise
a monad? It kind of seems so even if the method names do not really match those we find on monad literature.
version added: 1.5deferred. The deferred. promise() method allows an asynchronous function to prevent other code from interfering with the progress or status of its internal request.
A future is a placeholder object for a result that does not yet exist. A promise is a writable, single-assignment container, which completes a future. Promises can complete the future with a result to indicate success, or with an exception to indicate failure.
A future is an object that represents the result of an asynchronous computation, which may not yet be available.
Early implementations of promises and futures (a similar / related idea) began to appear in languages such as MultiLisp and Concurrent Prolog as early as the 1980's. The use of the word “promise” was coined by Barbara Liskov and Liuba Shrira in 1988[1].
While extremely similar. With JavaScript Promises that comply to the Promises/A+ spec .then
is not really a monadic bind and does .map
and .flatMap
both. Inside a .then
handler when you return a promise it will recursively unwrap it.
Promise.delay(1000).then(function() { return Promise.delay(1000).then(function () { return Promise.delay(2000); }).then(function () { return Promise.delay(5000) }); }).then(function () { alert("This is only shown after 8 seconds and not one"); });
(fiddle)
You are correct that the standard JS promise libraries and the A+ spec does not feature monadic promises. They have been discussed, and implementations like fantasy-promises exist. They follow a differnet spec and have little adoption. Also see this. There has been ongoing discussion about it in the language design discussion forum - esdiscuss and a monadic .chain
method that does not flatmap and allows for monadic promises is considered but unlikely to make it.
This is for pragmatic reasons. The current way promises are implemented is immensely useful. Rare are the cases you actually want a Future[Future
and normally you want continuations to just work in the language. Promises 'borrow' from monads and are 'monadic' in a sense themselves. .then
is very close to bind and in my head I use them interchangeably :)
It is impossible to have a Promise[Promise[Value]]
like a Future[Future[Value]]
in Scala with most promise libraries. You'd have to wrap it in an object and have Promise[Container[Promise[Value]]]
.
Promise.delay(1000).then(function () { return Promise.delay(1000).then(function () { return { wrap: Promise.delay(2000).then(function () { return Promise.delay(5000); }) }; }); }).then(function () { alert("This logs after 1 second"); // I've also not seen a really solid use case // except TypeScript type inference which is meh });
(fiddle)
There are also a number of other smaller differences between the two, but generally you are correct in your assertions.
It seems that in Javascript we call a Deferred the object we resolve to >complete a Promise. In Scala, it seems the Promise is the object you >resolve to get a Future monad.
Can someone tell me if this is right? Is there any good reason for a >different usage of the term Promise between Js and Scala?
In Scala, Promise and Future have separated functionality, Future is a asynchronous computation container, which return you some value in the future, and Promise is the writing part for async-computation, which you can do something as follow
val promise = Promise[String] val future1 = promise.future val future2 = future1.map { case s => println(s); s } future2.onSuccess { case s => println(s + " 2nd time") } promise.success("promise completed")
Once you execute the last statement, the output will be
promise completed promise completed 2nd time
In Scala,you read value from Future using onComplete, or you chain it using map, and you write to a Future using it's Promise counterpart
In JS Promise A+ specs, they are bundled together, Promise.then
is used for both chaining and retrieving value for side-effect (eg. console.log), to write you will use resolve
like code snippet below
var promise = new Promise(function(resolve, reject){ Thread.sleep(10000); resolve("promise completed"); }
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With