WARNING: THIS SITE IS A MIRROR OF GITHUB.COM / IT CANNOT LOGIN OR REGISTER ACCOUNTS / THE CONTENTS ARE PROVIDED AS-IS / THIS SITE ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DISPLAYED CONTENT OR LINKS / IF YOU FOUND SOMETHING MAY NOT GOOD FOR EVERYONE, CONTACT ADMIN AT ilovescratch@foxmail.com
Skip to content

Implement Future aggregation functions. #1981

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Open
player-03 wants to merge 1 commit into
base: 9.0.0-dev
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Implement Future aggregation functions. #1981

player-03 wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

@player-03
Copy link
Contributor

@player-03 player-03 commented Sep 1, 2025

These are based on JavaScript's promise concurrency functions, using Lime's nomenclature.

Supersedes #1844

@player-03
Copy link
Contributor Author

player-03 commented Sep 1, 2025

@EliteMasterEric How do these look to you?

@player-03
Copy link
Contributor Author

player-03 commented Jan 2, 2026

I'm going back and forth between calling it "allResolved" or "allSettled".

  • Lime's Promise class consistently uses the term "resolve".
  • We're copying JavaScript's functions, so it'd be more intuitive to use JavaScript's names.
  • The function works slightly differently than the JS version, so maybe a slightly different name will make the change more obvious.
  • Wikipedia uses the term "resolve".

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant

@player-03