4 ms·

You're not confused. I think you're right that both cljs/go and js/async blocks are giving a 'procedural way' to basically create an asynchronous processing/sta

You're not confused. I think you're right that both cljs/go and js/async blocks are giving a 'procedural way' to basically create an asynchronous processing/state machine. It would be interesting to see a fully-baked out analysis of async/await vs go and Promises vs channels. I do think Clojure still has the win on simplicity if for the main reason that core.async is just a library [2] and Javascript implements async/await via syntax with the actual implementation at a subterranean level. Clojure's version (core.async) can be macroexpanded/unwound -- i.e., the 'magic' you speak of is not magic at all and can be examined and implemented directly w/in ClojureScript itself. From the channels vs Promise perspective I think there is more to argue. Channels are quite a simple concept when weighed against the Promise spec [3]; of course this is arguable and arguments welcome. Also worht considering David Nolen's takes, one of them here: [4] [1] https://clojure.github.io/core.async/ https://clojure.github.io/core.async/ [2] https://clojure.org/news/2013/06/28/clojure-clore-async-channels https://clojure.org/news/2013/06/28/clojure-clore-async-chan... [3] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Promise https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe... [4] https://swannodette.github.io/2013/08/23/make-no-promises https://swannodette.github.io/2013/08/23/make-no-promises Edits: typos/cosmetic.

ithkuil 7y ago
we're mixing up language implementation issues and the underlying primitives. https://github.com/athos/kitchen-async https://github.com/athos/kitchen-async offers a macro-based pure clojure expansion/unwinding of calls to functions returning promises, in a way that is similar to what javascript does with their treating of functions annotated with the async keyword that invoke other functions through the await keyword. For me, the interesting bit is more in the difference in the primitive building block: a channel of values (where nil is disallowed) vs the result of a "computation" which can either succeed or fail. The channel approach is the most minimal; in fact you can implement a "computation" on top of the channel approach by passing tuples of (result, error) in a channel and then closing it.

ithkuil 7y ago

we're mixing up language implementation issues and the underlying primitives. https://github.com/athos/kitchen-async https://github.com/athos/kitchen-async offers a macro-based pure clojure expansion/unwinding of calls to functions returning promises, in a way that is similar to what javascript does with their treating of functions annotated with the async keyword that invoke other functions through the await keyword. For me, the interesting bit is more in the difference in the primitive building block: a channel of values (where nil is disallowed) vs the result of a "computation" which can either succeed or fail. The channel approach is the most minimal; in fact you can implement a "computation" on top of the channel approach by passing tuples of (result, error) in a channel and then closing it.