Resolve promises in iteration - javascript

I'm looking to iterate over a number of promises but the lambda function is completing before they are resolved.
module.exports.handler= async(event, context, callback) => {
let a = {'a': 'b', 'x', 'y'};
let b = {'i': 'n'};
Object.keys(listA).map(async ax => {
Object.keys(listB).map(async bx => {
await validate(ax, bx);
}
}
}
async function validate(a, b) {
let promise = getPromise(a, b);
await promise.then((output) => {
...
console.log('success');
});
}
How can all the promises be resolved before the process completes?

This is because awaits in loops that require a callback will not be processed synchronously (See this).
One way you could avoid this is you could build an array of promises, and use Promise.all to await completion.
Example:
module.exports.handler = (event, context, callback) => {
let a = {'a': 'b', 'x': 'foo', 'y': 'bar'};
let b = {'i': 'n'};
let promises = []
Object.keys(a).forEach(ax => {
Object.keys(b).forEach(bx => {
promises.push(validate(ax, bx));
})
})
Promise.all(promises)
.then(results => {
//do stuff with results
})
.catch(error => {
//handle error
})
}

The Promise.allSettled() method returns a promise that resolves after all of the given promises have either resolved or rejected, with an array of objects that each describes the outcome of each promise.
you can use #Michael solution just replace Promise.all with
Promise.allSettled
The Promise.allSettled() method returns a promise that resolves after
all of the given promises have either resolved or rejected, with an
array of objects that each describes the outcome of each promise mozilla Doc.
The Promise.all() method returns a single Promise that fulfills when
all of the promises passed as an iterable have been fulfilled or when
the iterable contains no promises. It rejects with the reason of the
first promise that rejects mozilla doc.
module.exports.handler = (event, context, callback) => {
let a = {'a': 'b', 'x': 'foo', 'y': 'bar'};
let b = {'i': 'n'};
let promises = []
Object.keys(a).forEach(ax => {
Object.keys(b).forEach(bx => {
promises.push(validate(ax, bx));
})
})
Promise.allSettled(promises)
.then(results => {
//do stuff with results
})
.catch(error => {
//handle error
})
}
const promise1 = Promise.resolve(3);
const promise2 = new Promise((resolve, reject) => setTimeout(reject, 100, 'foo'));
const promise3 = Promise.resolve(4);
const promises = [promise1, promise2,promise3];
Promise.allSettled(promises).
then((results) => results.forEach((result) => console.log(result.status)));
// expected output:
// "fulfilled"
// "rejected"
// "fulfilled"

Related

Why Promise.all doesn't reject when a non-promise throws an error?

As per MDN,
The Promise.all() method takes an iterable of promises as an input,
and returns a single Promise that resolves to an array of the results
of the input promises. This returned promise will resolve when all of
the input's promises have resolved, or if the input iterable contains
no promises. It rejects immediately upon any of the input promises
rejecting or non-promises throwing an error, and will reject with this
first rejection message / error.
Here is a code-snippet which doesn't catch the error as I expected it to as per above definition :-
const promise1 = Promise.resolve(3);
const promise2 = () => {throw new Error('random error')};
const promise3 = new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(resolve, 100, 'foo');
});
Promise.all([promise1, promise2(), promise3]).then((values) => {
console.log(values);
}).catch(e=>console.log('Error caught',e));
I know if I convert the promise2() to return a Promise which rejects then it will work. But what about the non-promises line ? Is it incorrect or am I missing something ?
Update - I got the answer for this behavior. Just curious about what could be possible scenarios for non-promises throwing an error as per the definition ?
Because the error is thrown before you call Promise.all. It's impossible for Promise.all to convert that to rejection for you.
You're calling promise2 when building the array, which happens before you pass that array to Promise.all.
Your code here:
Promise.all([promise1, promise2(), promise3])/*...*/
...is equivalent to the following (other than the variables):
const x0 = promise1;
const x1 = promise2(); // <==== Error is thrown here
const x2 = promise3;
const array = [x0, x1, x2];
Promise.all(array)/*...*/
To make it work as you want, you have several options:
You could make it an async function, as TKoL pointed out in a comment:
const promise1 = Promise.resolve(3);
const promise2 = async () => {throw new Error('random error')};
const promise3 = new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(resolve, 100, 'foo');
});
Promise.all([promise1, promise2(), promise3]).then((values) => {
console.log(values);
}).catch(e=>console.log('Error caught',e));
That works because async functions always return promises (even if you don't use await) and an error in an async function rejects the promise it returns.
You could make promise2 a thenable so it doesn't throw until then is called, then Promise.all would convert that to rejection for you:
const promise1 = Promise.resolve(3);
const promise2 = {
then() {
throw new Error('random error');
}
};
const promise3 = new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(resolve, 100, 'foo');
});
// Note no () on promise2 below
Promise.all([promise1, promise2, promise3]).then((values) => {
console.log(values);
}).catch(e=>console.log('Error caught',e));
JS first tries to get the arguments correct - then passes the arguments to the function which is called. In your scenario, an error is thrown even before the Promise.all is called.
To better understand the situation and realize that the Promise interface has nothing to do with your case, see the attached snippet. The PromiseAllTest function is called with the 3 arguments included in the quesion. But you can see the function is not even called. The error is thrown before it.
const promise1 = Promise.resolve(3);
const promise2 = () => {throw new Error('random error')};
const promise3 = new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(resolve, 100, 'foo');
});
try{
console.log('Preparing to call Promise Test');
PromiseAllTest([promise1, promise2(), promise3]);
console.log('Promise Test is called successfully');
}
catch(e) {
console.log('Promise Test is not even called')
}
function PromiseAllTest(promiseArray) {
console.log('Start Processing');
console.log(promiseArray);
console.og('End Processing');
}

Handle a reject in promise.all() in javascript [duplicate]

I have an array of Promises that I'm resolving with Promise.all(arrayOfPromises);
I go on to continue the promise chain. Looks something like this
existingPromiseChain = existingPromiseChain.then(function() {
var arrayOfPromises = state.routes.map(function(route){
return route.handler.promiseHandler();
});
return Promise.all(arrayOfPromises)
});
existingPromiseChain = existingPromiseChain.then(function(arrayResolved) {
// do stuff with my array of resolved promises, eventually ending with a res.send();
});
I want to add a catch statement to handle an individual promise in case it errors, but when I try, Promise.all returns the first error it finds (disregards the rest), and then I can't get the data from the rest of the promises in the array (that didn't error).
I've tried doing something like ..
existingPromiseChain = existingPromiseChain.then(function() {
var arrayOfPromises = state.routes.map(function(route){
return route.handler.promiseHandler()
.then(function(data) {
return data;
})
.catch(function(err) {
return err
});
});
return Promise.all(arrayOfPromises)
});
existingPromiseChain = existingPromiseChain.then(function(arrayResolved) {
// do stuff with my array of resolved promises, eventually ending with a res.send();
});
But that doesn't resolve.
Thanks!
--
Edit:
What the answers below said were completely true, the code was breaking due to other reasons. In case anyone is interested, this is the solution I ended up with ...
Node Express Server Chain
serverSidePromiseChain
.then(function(AppRouter) {
var arrayOfPromises = state.routes.map(function(route) {
return route.async();
});
Promise.all(arrayOfPromises)
.catch(function(err) {
// log that I have an error, return the entire array;
console.log('A promise failed to resolve', err);
return arrayOfPromises;
})
.then(function(arrayOfPromises) {
// full array of resolved promises;
})
};
API Call (route.async call)
return async()
.then(function(result) {
// dispatch a success
return result;
})
.catch(function(err) {
// dispatch a failure and throw error
throw err;
});
Putting the .catch for Promise.all before the .then seems to have served the purpose of catching any errors from the original promises, but then returning the entire array to the next .then
Thanks!
Promise.all is all or nothing. It resolves once all promises in the array resolve, or reject as soon as one of them rejects. In other words, it either resolves with an array of all resolved values, or rejects with a single error.
Some libraries have something called Promise.when, which I understand would instead wait for all promises in the array to either resolve or reject, but I'm not familiar with it, and it's not in ES6.
Your code
I agree with others here that your fix should work. It should resolve with an array that may contain a mix of successful values and errors objects. It's unusual to pass error objects in the success-path but assuming your code is expecting them, I see no problem with it.
The only reason I can think of why it would "not resolve" is that it's failing in code you're not showing us and the reason you're not seeing any error message about this is because this promise chain is not terminated with a final catch (as far as what you're showing us anyway).
I've taken the liberty of factoring out the "existing chain" from your example and terminating the chain with a catch. This may not be right for you, but for people reading this, it's important to always either return or terminate chains, or potential errors, even coding errors, will get hidden (which is what I suspect happened here):
Promise.all(state.routes.map(function(route) {
return route.handler.promiseHandler().catch(function(err) {
return err;
});
}))
.then(function(arrayOfValuesOrErrors) {
// handling of my array containing values and/or errors.
})
.catch(function(err) {
console.log(err.message); // some coding error in handling happened
});
NEW ANSWER
const results = await Promise.all(promises.map(p => p.catch(e => e)));
const validResults = results.filter(result => !(result instanceof Error));
FUTURE Promise API
Chrome 76: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Promise/allSettled
You can download https://www.npmjs.com/package/promise.allsettled to get it now. In certain browsers allSettled comes preinstalled with the browser itself. It's worth downloading the package for peace of mind because eg. TypeScript doesn't have default definitions for allSettled.
ES2020 introduces new method for the Promise type: Promise.allSettled().
Promise.allSettled gives you a signal when all the input promises are settled, which means they’re either fulfilled or rejected. This is useful in cases where you don’t care about the state of the promise, you just want to know when the work is done, regardless of whether it was successful.
async function() {
const promises = [
fetch('/api.stackexchange.com/2.2'), // succeeds
fetch('/this-will-fail') // fails
];
const result = await Promise.allSettled(promises);
console.log(result.map(promise => promise.status));
// ['fulfilled', 'rejected']
}
Read more in the v8 blog post.
To continue the Promise.all loop (even when a Promise rejects) I wrote a utility function which is called executeAllPromises. This utility function returns an object with results and errors.
The idea is that all Promises you pass to executeAllPromises will be wrapped into a new Promise which will always resolve. The new Promise resolves with an array which has 2 spots. The first spot holds the resolving value (if any) and the second spot keeps the error (if the wrapped Promise rejects).
As a final step the executeAllPromises accumulates all values of the wrapped promises and returns the final object with an array for results and an array for errors.
Here is the code:
function executeAllPromises(promises) {
// Wrap all Promises in a Promise that will always "resolve"
var resolvingPromises = promises.map(function(promise) {
return new Promise(function(resolve) {
var payload = new Array(2);
promise.then(function(result) {
payload[0] = result;
})
.catch(function(error) {
payload[1] = error;
})
.then(function() {
/*
* The wrapped Promise returns an array:
* The first position in the array holds the result (if any)
* The second position in the array holds the error (if any)
*/
resolve(payload);
});
});
});
var errors = [];
var results = [];
// Execute all wrapped Promises
return Promise.all(resolvingPromises)
.then(function(items) {
items.forEach(function(payload) {
if (payload[1]) {
errors.push(payload[1]);
} else {
results.push(payload[0]);
}
});
return {
errors: errors,
results: results
};
});
}
var myPromises = [
Promise.resolve(1),
Promise.resolve(2),
Promise.reject(new Error('3')),
Promise.resolve(4),
Promise.reject(new Error('5'))
];
executeAllPromises(myPromises).then(function(items) {
// Result
var errors = items.errors.map(function(error) {
return error.message
}).join(',');
var results = items.results.join(',');
console.log(`Executed all ${myPromises.length} Promises:`);
console.log(`— ${items.results.length} Promises were successful: ${results}`);
console.log(`— ${items.errors.length} Promises failed: ${errors}`);
});
Promise.allSettled
Instead of Promise.all use Promise.allSettled which waits for all promises to settle, regardless of the result
let p1 = new Promise(resolve => resolve("result1"));
let p2 = new Promise( (resolve,reject) => reject('some troubles') );
let p3 = new Promise(resolve => resolve("result3"));
// It returns info about each promise status and value
Promise.allSettled([p1,p2,p3]).then(result=> console.log(result));
Polyfill
if (!Promise.allSettled) {
const rejectHandler = reason => ({ status: 'rejected', reason });
const resolveHandler = value => ({ status: 'fulfilled', value });
Promise.allSettled = function (promises) {
const convertedPromises = promises
.map(p => Promise.resolve(p).then(resolveHandler, rejectHandler));
return Promise.all(convertedPromises);
};
}
As #jib said,
Promise.all is all or nothing.
Though, you can control certain promises that are "allowed" to fail and we would like to proceed to .then.
For example.
Promise.all([
doMustAsyncTask1,
doMustAsyncTask2,
doOptionalAsyncTask
.catch(err => {
if( /* err non-critical */) {
return
}
// if critical then fail
throw err
})
])
.then(([ mustRes1, mustRes2, optionalRes ]) => {
// proceed to work with results
})
Using Async await -
here one async function func1 is returning a resolved value, and func2 is throwing a error and returning a null in this situation, we can handle it how we want and return accordingly.
const callingFunction = async () => {
const manyPromises = await Promise.all([func1(), func2()]);
console.log(manyPromises);
}
const func1 = async () => {
return 'func1'
}
const func2 = async () => {
try {
let x;
if (!x) throw "x value not present"
} catch(err) {
return null
}
}
callingFunction();
Output is - [ 'func1', null ]
if you get to use the q library https://github.com/kriskowal/q
it has q.allSettled() method that can solve this problem
you can handle every promise depending on its state either fullfiled or rejected
so
existingPromiseChain = existingPromiseChain.then(function() {
var arrayOfPromises = state.routes.map(function(route){
return route.handler.promiseHandler();
});
return q.allSettled(arrayOfPromises)
});
existingPromiseChain = existingPromiseChain.then(function(arrayResolved) {
//so here you have all your promises the fulfilled and the rejected ones
// you can check the state of each promise
arrayResolved.forEach(function(item){
if(item.state === 'fulfilled'){ // 'rejected' for rejected promises
//do somthing
} else {
// do something else
}
})
// do stuff with my array of resolved promises, eventually ending with a res.send();
});
For those using ES8 that stumble here, you can do something like the following, using async functions:
var arrayOfPromises = state.routes.map(async function(route){
try {
return await route.handler.promiseHandler();
} catch(e) {
// Do something to handle the error.
// Errored promises will return whatever you return here (undefined if you don't return anything).
}
});
var resolvedPromises = await Promise.all(arrayOfPromises);
Promise.allSettled with a filter
const promises = [
fetch('/api-call-1'),
fetch('/api-call-2'),
fetch('/api-call-3'),
];
// Imagine some of these requests fail, and some succeed.
const resultFilter = (result, error) => result.filter(i => i.status === (!error ? 'fulfilled' : 'rejected')).map(i => (!error ? i.value : i.reason));
const result = await Promise.allSettled(promises);
const fulfilled = resultFilter(result); // all fulfilled results
const rejected = resultFilter(result, true); // all rejected results
Have you considered Promise.prototype.finally()?
It seems to be designed to do exactly what you want - execute a function once all the promises have settled (resolved/rejected), regardless of some of the promises being rejected.
From the MDN documentation:
The finally() method can be useful if you want to do some processing or cleanup once the promise is settled, regardless of its outcome.
The finally() method is very similar to calling .then(onFinally, onFinally) however there are couple of differences:
When creating a function inline, you can pass it once, instead of being forced to either declare it twice, or create a variable for it.
A finally callback will not receive any argument, since there's no reliable means of determining if the promise was fulfilled or rejected. This use case is for precisely when you do not care about the rejection reason, or the fulfillment value, and so there's no need to provide it.
Unlike Promise.resolve(2).then(() => {}, () => {}) (which will be resolved with undefined), Promise.resolve(2).finally(() => {}) will be resolved with 2.
Similarly, unlike Promise.reject(3).then(() => {}, () => {}) (which will be fulfilled with undefined), Promise.reject(3).finally(() => {}) will be rejected with 3.
== Fallback ==
If your version of JavaScript doesn't support Promise.prototype.finally() you can use this workaround from Jake Archibald: Promise.all(promises.map(p => p.catch(() => undefined)));
We can handle the rejection at the individual promises level, so when we get the results in our result array, the array index which has been rejected will be undefined. We can handle that situation as needed, and use the remaining results.
Here I have rejected the first promise, so it comes as undefined, but we can use the result of the second promise, which is at index 1.
const manyPromises = Promise.all([func1(), func2()]).then(result => {
console.log(result[0]); // undefined
console.log(result[1]); // func2
});
function func1() {
return new Promise( (res, rej) => rej('func1')).catch(err => {
console.log('error handled', err);
});
}
function func2() {
return new Promise( (res, rej) => setTimeout(() => res('func2'), 500) );
}
const promise1 = Promise.resolve(3);
const promise2 = new Promise((resolve, reject) => setTimeout(reject, 100, 'foo'));
const promises = [promise1, promise2];
let sum = 0;
let promiseErrorArr = [];
Promise.allSettled(promises)
.then((results) => {
results.forEach(result => {
if (result.status === "rejected") {
sum += 1;
promiseErrorArr.push(result)
}
})
return ( (sum>0) ? promiseFailed() : promisePassed())
})
function promiseFailed(){
console.log('one or all failed!')
console.log(promiseErrorArr)
}
function promisePassed(){
console.log('all passed!')
}
// expected output:
// "one or all failed!"
// Array [Object { status: "rejected", reason: "foo" }]
Alternately, if you have a case where you don't particularly care about the values of the resolved promises when there is one failure but you still want them to have run, you could do something like this which will resolve with the promises as normal when they all succeed and reject with the failed promises when any of them fail:
function promiseNoReallyAll (promises) {
return new Promise(
async (resolve, reject) => {
const failedPromises = []
const successfulPromises = await Promise.all(
promises.map(
promise => promise.catch(error => {
failedPromises.push(error)
})
)
)
if (failedPromises.length) {
reject(failedPromises)
} else {
resolve(successfulPromises)
}
}
)
}
You can always wrap your promise returning functions in a way that they catches failure and returning instead an agreed value (e.g. error.message), so the exception won't roll all the way up to the Promise.all function and disable it.
async function resetCache(ip) {
try {
const response = await axios.get(`http://${ip}/resetcache`);
return response;
}catch (e) {
return {status: 'failure', reason: 'e.message'};
}
}
I've found a way (workaround) to do this without making it sync.
So as it was mentioned before Promise.all is all of none.
so... Use an enclosing promise to catch and force resolve.
let safePromises = originalPrmises.map((imageObject) => {
return new Promise((resolve) => {
// Do something error friendly
promise.then(_res => resolve(res)).catch(_err => resolve(err))
})
})
})
// safe
return Promise.all(safePromises)
You would need to know how to identify an error in your results. If you do not have a standard expected error, I suggest that you run a transformation on each error in the catch block that makes it identifiable in your results.
try {
let resArray = await Promise.all(
state.routes.map(route => route.handler.promiseHandler().catch(e => e))
);
// in catch(e => e) you can transform your error to a type or object
// that makes it easier for you to identify whats an error in resArray
// e.g. if you expect your err objects to have e.type, you can filter
// all errors in the array eg
// let errResponse = resArray.filter(d => d && d.type === '<expected type>')
// let notNullResponse = resArray.filter(d => d)
} catch (err) {
// code related errors
}
Not the best way to error log, but you can always set everything to an array for the promiseAll, and store the resulting results into new variables.
If you use graphQL you need to postprocess the response regardless and if it doesn't find the correct reference it'll crash the app, narrowing down where the problem is at
const results = await Promise.all([
this.props.client.query({
query: GET_SPECIAL_DATES,
}),
this.props.client.query({
query: GET_SPECIAL_DATE_TYPES,
}),
this.props.client.query({
query: GET_ORDER_DATES,
}),
]).catch(e=>console.log(e,"error"));
const specialDates = results[0].data.specialDates;
const specialDateTypes = results[1].data.specialDateTypes;
const orderDates = results[2].data.orders;
Unfortunately, I don't have enough reputation to comment (or do much of anything, really), so I'm posting this as an answer in response to Eric's answer here.
The executor function can also be an async function. However, this is usually a mistake, for a few reasons:
If an async executor function throws an error, the error will be lost and won’t cause the newly-constructed Promise to reject. This could make it difficult to debug and handle some errors.
If a Promise executor function is using await, this is usually a sign that it is not actually necessary to use the new Promise constructor, or the scope of the new Promise constructor can be reduced.
From this explanation as to why Promises should not utilize an async executor function
Instead, you should opt for Promise.allSettled(), as suggested here by Asaf.
With the help of allSettled,we can now read the status of
each promise is, and process each error individually, without losing any of this critical information
const promises = [
fetch('/api/first'), // first
fetch('/api/second') // second
];
The simplest way is to handle errors
const [firstResult, secondResult] = await Promise.allSettled(promises)
// Process first
if (firstResult.status === 'rejected') {
const err = firstResult.reason
// Here you can handle error
} else {
const first = firstResult.value
}
// Process second
if (secondResult.status === 'rejected') {
const err = secondResult.reason
// Here you can handle error
} else {
const second = secondResult.value
}
A nice way to handle error
const results = await Promise.allSettled(promises);
const [first, second] = handleResults(results)
function handleResults(results) {
const errors = results.filter(result => result.status === 'rejected').map(result => result.reason)
if (errors.length) {
// Aggregate all errors into one
throw new AggregateError(errors)
}
return results.map(result => result.value)
}
That's how Promise.all is designed to work. If a single promise reject()'s, the entire method immediately fails.
There are use cases where one might want to have the Promise.all allowing for promises to fail. To make this happen, simply don't use any reject() statements in your promise. However, to ensure your app/script does not freeze in case any single underlying promise never gets a response, you need to put a timeout on it.
function getThing(uid,branch){
return new Promise(function (resolve, reject) {
xhr.get().then(function(res) {
if (res) {
resolve(res);
}
else {
resolve(null);
}
setTimeout(function(){reject('timeout')},10000)
}).catch(function(error) {
resolve(null);
});
});
}
I wrote a npm library to deal with this problem more beautiful.
https://github.com/wenshin/promiseallend
Install
npm i --save promiseallend
2017-02-25 new api, it's not break promise principles
const promiseAllEnd = require('promiseallend');
const promises = [Promise.resolve(1), Promise.reject('error'), Promise.resolve(2)];
const promisesObj = {k1: Promise.resolve(1), k2: Promise.reject('error'), k3: Promise.resolve(2)};
// input promises with array
promiseAllEnd(promises, {
unhandledRejection(error, index) {
// error is the original error which is 'error'.
// index is the index of array, it's a number.
console.log(error, index);
}
})
// will call, data is `[1, undefined, 2]`
.then(data => console.log(data))
// won't call
.catch(error => console.log(error.detail))
// input promises with object
promiseAllEnd(promisesObj, {
unhandledRejection(error, prop) {
// error is the original error.
// key is the property of object.
console.log(error, prop);
}
})
// will call, data is `{k1: 1, k3: 2}`
.then(data => console.log(data))
// won't call
.catch(error => console.log(error.detail))
// the same to `Promise.all`
promiseAllEnd(promises, {requireConfig: true})
// will call, `error.detail` is 'error', `error.key` is number 1.
.catch(error => console.log(error.detail))
// requireConfig is Array
promiseAllEnd(promises, {requireConfig: [false, true, false]})
// won't call
.then(data => console.log(data))
// will call, `error.detail` is 'error', `error.key` is number 1.
.catch(error => console.log(error.detail))
// requireConfig is Array
promiseAllEnd(promises, {requireConfig: [true, false, false]})
// will call, data is `[1, undefined, 2]`.
.then(data => console.log(data))
// won't call
.catch(error => console.log(error.detail))
————————————————————————————————
Old bad api, do not use it!
let promiseAllEnd = require('promiseallend');
// input promises with array
promiseAllEnd([Promise.resolve(1), Promise.reject('error'), Promise.resolve(2)])
.then(data => console.log(data)) // [1, undefined, 2]
.catch(error => console.log(error.errorsByKey)) // {1: 'error'}
// input promises with object
promiseAllEnd({k1: Promise.resolve(1), k2: Promise.reject('error'), k3: Promise.resolve(2)})
.then(data => console.log(data)) // {k1: 1, k3: 2}
.catch(error => console.log(error.errorsByKey)) // {k2: 'error'}

Use async/await inside promise.then [duplicate]

Consider the following code that reads an array of files in a serial/sequential manner. readFiles returns a promise, which is resolved only once all files have been read in sequence.
var readFile = function(file) {
... // Returns a promise.
};
var readFiles = function(files) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
var readSequential = function(index) {
if (index >= files.length) {
resolve();
} else {
readFile(files[index]).then(function() {
readSequential(index + 1);
}).catch(reject);
}
};
readSequential(0); // Start with the first file!
});
};
The above code works, but I don't like having to do recursion for things to occur sequentially. Is there a simpler way that this code can be re-written so that I don't have to use my weird readSequential function?
Originally I tried to use Promise.all, but that caused all of the readFile calls to happen concurrently, which is not what I want:
var readFiles = function(files) {
return Promise.all(files.map(function(file) {
return readFile(file);
}));
};
Update 2017: I would use an async function if the environment supports it:
async function readFiles(files) {
for(const file of files) {
await readFile(file);
}
};
If you'd like, you can defer reading the files until you need them using an async generator (if your environment supports it):
async function* readFiles(files) {
for(const file of files) {
yield await readFile(file);
}
};
Update: In second thought - I might use a for loop instead:
var readFiles = function(files) {
var p = Promise.resolve(); // Q() in q
files.forEach(file =>
p = p.then(() => readFile(file));
);
return p;
};
Or more compactly, with reduce:
var readFiles = function(files) {
return files.reduce((p, file) => {
return p.then(() => readFile(file));
}, Promise.resolve()); // initial
};
In other promise libraries (like when and Bluebird) you have utility methods for this.
For example, Bluebird would be:
var Promise = require("bluebird");
var fs = Promise.promisifyAll(require("fs"));
var readAll = Promise.resolve(files).map(fs.readFileAsync,{concurrency: 1 });
// if the order matters, you can use Promise.each instead and omit concurrency param
readAll.then(function(allFileContents){
// do stuff to read files.
});
Although there is really no reason not to use async await today.
Here is how I prefer to run tasks in series.
function runSerial() {
var that = this;
// task1 is a function that returns a promise (and immediately starts executing)
// task2 is a function that returns a promise (and immediately starts executing)
return Promise.resolve()
.then(function() {
return that.task1();
})
.then(function() {
return that.task2();
})
.then(function() {
console.log(" ---- done ----");
});
}
What about cases with more tasks? Like, 10?
function runSerial(tasks) {
var result = Promise.resolve();
tasks.forEach(task => {
result = result.then(() => task());
});
return result;
}
This question is old, but we live in a world of ES6 and functional JavaScript, so let's see how we can improve.
Because promises execute immediately, we can't just create an array of promises, they would all fire off in parallel.
Instead, we need to create an array of functions that returns a promise. Each function will then be executed sequentially, which then starts the promise inside.
We can solve this a few ways, but my favorite way is to use reduce.
It gets a little tricky using reduce in combination with promises, so I have broken down the one liner into some smaller digestible bites below.
The essence of this function is to use reduce starting with an initial value of Promise.resolve([]), or a promise containing an empty array.
This promise will then be passed into the reduce method as promise. This is the key to chaining each promise together sequentially. The next promise to execute is func and when the then fires, the results are concatenated and that promise is then returned, executing the reduce cycle with the next promise function.
Once all promises have executed, the returned promise will contain an array of all the results of each promise.
ES6 Example (one liner)
/*
* serial executes Promises sequentially.
* #param {funcs} An array of funcs that return promises.
* #example
* const urls = ['/url1', '/url2', '/url3']
* serial(urls.map(url => () => $.ajax(url)))
* .then(console.log.bind(console))
*/
const serial = funcs =>
funcs.reduce((promise, func) =>
promise.then(result => func().then(Array.prototype.concat.bind(result))), Promise.resolve([]))
ES6 Example (broken down)
// broken down to for easier understanding
const concat = list => Array.prototype.concat.bind(list)
const promiseConcat = f => x => f().then(concat(x))
const promiseReduce = (acc, x) => acc.then(promiseConcat(x))
/*
* serial executes Promises sequentially.
* #param {funcs} An array of funcs that return promises.
* #example
* const urls = ['/url1', '/url2', '/url3']
* serial(urls.map(url => () => $.ajax(url)))
* .then(console.log.bind(console))
*/
const serial = funcs => funcs.reduce(promiseReduce, Promise.resolve([]))
Usage:
// first take your work
const urls = ['/url1', '/url2', '/url3', '/url4']
// next convert each item to a function that returns a promise
const funcs = urls.map(url => () => $.ajax(url))
// execute them serially
serial(funcs)
.then(console.log.bind(console))
To do this simply in ES6:
function(files) {
// Create a new empty promise (don't do that with real people ;)
var sequence = Promise.resolve();
// Loop over each file, and add on a promise to the
// end of the 'sequence' promise.
files.forEach(file => {
// Chain one computation onto the sequence
sequence =
sequence
.then(() => performComputation(file))
.then(result => doSomething(result));
// Resolves for each file, one at a time.
})
// This will resolve after the entire chain is resolved
return sequence;
}
Addition example
const addTwo = async () => 2;
const addThree = async (inValue) => new Promise((resolve) => setTimeout(resolve(inValue + 3), 2000));
const addFour = (inValue) => new Promise((res) => setTimeout(res(inValue + 4), 1000));
const addFive = async (inValue) => inValue + 5;
// Function which handles promises from above
async function sequenceAddition() {
let sum = await [addTwo, addThree, addFour, addFive].reduce(
(promise, currPromise) => promise.then((val) => currPromise(val)),
Promise.resolve()
);
console.log('sum:', sum); // 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 = 14
}
// Run function. See console for result.
sequenceAddition();
General syntax to use reduce()
function sequence(tasks, fn) {
return tasks.reduce((promise, task) => promise.then(() => fn(task)), Promise.resolve());
}
UPDATE
items-promise is a ready to use NPM package doing the same.
I've had to run a lot of sequential tasks and used these answers to forge a function that would take care of handling any sequential task...
function one_by_one(objects_array, iterator, callback) {
var start_promise = objects_array.reduce(function (prom, object) {
return prom.then(function () {
return iterator(object);
});
}, Promise.resolve()); // initial
if(callback){
start_promise.then(callback);
}else{
return start_promise;
}
}
The function takes 2 arguments + 1 optional. First argument is the array on which we will be working. The second argument is the task itself, a function that returns a promise, the next task will be started only when this promise resolves. The third argument is a callback to run when all tasks have been done. If no callback is passed, then the function returns the promise it created so we can handle the end.
Here's an example of usage:
var filenames = ['1.jpg','2.jpg','3.jpg'];
var resize_task = function(filename){
//return promise of async resizing with filename
};
one_by_one(filenames,resize_task );
Hope it saves someone some time...
With Async/Await (if you have the support of ES7)
function downloadFile(fileUrl) { ... } // This function return a Promise
async function main()
{
var filesList = [...];
for (const file of filesList) {
await downloadFile(file);
}
}
(you must use for loop, and not forEach because async/await has problems running in forEach loop)
Without Async/Await (using Promise)
function downloadFile(fileUrl) { ... } // This function return a Promise
function downloadRecursion(filesList, index)
{
index = index || 0;
if (index < filesList.length)
{
downloadFile(filesList[index]).then(function()
{
index++;
downloadRecursion(filesList, index); // self invocation - recursion!
});
}
else
{
return Promise.resolve();
}
}
function main()
{
var filesList = [...];
downloadRecursion(filesList);
}
My preferred solution:
function processArray(arr, fn) {
return arr.reduce(
(p, v) => p.then((a) => fn(v).then(r => a.concat([r]))),
Promise.resolve([])
);
}
It's not fundamentally different from others published here but:
Applies the function to items in series
Resolves to an array of results
Doesn't require async/await (support is still quite limited, circa 2017)
Uses arrow functions; nice and concise
Example usage:
const numbers = [0, 4, 20, 100];
const multiplyBy3 = (x) => new Promise(res => res(x * 3));
// Prints [ 0, 12, 60, 300 ]
processArray(numbers, multiplyBy3).then(console.log);
Tested on reasonable current Chrome (v59) and NodeJS (v8.1.2).
First, you need to understand that a promise is executed at the time of creation.
So for example if you have a code:
["a","b","c"].map(x => returnsPromise(x))
You need to change it to:
["a","b","c"].map(x => () => returnsPromise(x))
Then we need to sequentially chain promises:
["a", "b", "c"].map(x => () => returnsPromise(x))
.reduce(
(before, after) => before.then(_ => after()),
Promise.resolve()
)
executing after(), will make sure that promise is created (and executed) only when its time comes.
Nicest solution that I was able to figure out was with bluebird promises. You can just do Promise.resolve(files).each(fs.readFileAsync); which guarantees that promises are resolved sequentially in order.
With async/await of ES2016 (and maybe some features of ES2018), this can be reduced to this form:
function readFile(file) {
... // Returns a promise.
}
async function readFiles(files) {
for (file in files) {
await readFile(file)
}
}
I haven't seen another answer express that simplicity. The OP said parallel execution of readFile was not desired. However, with IO like this it really makes sense to not be blocking on a single file read, while keeping the loop execution synchronous (you don't want to do the next step until all files have been read). Since I just learned about this and am a bit excited about it, I'll share that approach of parallel asynchronous execution of readFile with overall synchronous execution of readFiles.
async function readFiles(files) {
await Promise.all(files.map(readFile))
}
Isn't that a thing of beauty?
This is a slight variation of another answer above. Using native Promises:
function inSequence(tasks) {
return tasks.reduce((p, task) => p.then(task), Promise.resolve())
}
Explanation
If you have these tasks [t1, t2, t3], then the above is equivalent to Promise.resolve().then(t1).then(t2).then(t3). It's the behavior of reduce.
How to use
First You need to construct a list of tasks! A task is a function that accepts no argument. If you need to pass arguments to your function, then use bind or other methods to create a task. For example:
var tasks = files.map(file => processFile.bind(null, file))
inSequence(tasks).then(...)
I created this simple method on the Promise object:
Create and add a Promise.sequence method to the Promise object
Promise.sequence = function (chain) {
var results = [];
var entries = chain;
if (entries.entries) entries = entries.entries();
return new Promise(function (yes, no) {
var next = function () {
var entry = entries.next();
if(entry.done) yes(results);
else {
results.push(entry.value[1]().then(next, function() { no(results); } ));
}
};
next();
});
};
Usage:
var todo = [];
todo.push(firstPromise);
if (someCriterium) todo.push(optionalPromise);
todo.push(lastPromise);
// Invoking them
Promise.sequence(todo)
.then(function(results) {}, function(results) {});
The best thing about this extension to the Promise object, is that it is consistent with the style of promises. Promise.all and Promise.sequence is invoked the same way, but have different semantics.
Caution
Sequential running of promises is not usually a very good way to use promises. It's usually better to use Promise.all, and let the browser run the code as fast as possible. However, there are real use cases for it - for example when writing a mobile app using javascript.
My answer based on https://stackoverflow.com/a/31070150/7542429.
Promise.series = function series(arrayOfPromises) {
var results = [];
return arrayOfPromises.reduce(function(seriesPromise, promise) {
return seriesPromise.then(function() {
return promise
.then(function(result) {
results.push(result);
});
});
}, Promise.resolve())
.then(function() {
return results;
});
};
This solution returns the results as an array like Promise.all().
Usage:
Promise.series([array of promises])
.then(function(results) {
// do stuff with results here
});
Use Array.prototype.reduce, and remember to wrap your promises in a function otherwise they will already be running!
// array of Promise providers
const providers = [
function(){
return Promise.resolve(1);
},
function(){
return Promise.resolve(2);
},
function(){
return Promise.resolve(3);
}
]
const inSeries = function(providers){
const seed = Promise.resolve(null);
return providers.reduce(function(a,b){
return a.then(b);
}, seed);
};
nice and easy...
you should be able to re-use the same seed for performance, etc.
It's important to guard against empty arrays or arrays with only 1 element when using reduce, so this technique is your best bet:
const providers = [
function(v){
return Promise.resolve(v+1);
},
function(v){
return Promise.resolve(v+2);
},
function(v){
return Promise.resolve(v+3);
}
]
const inSeries = function(providers, initialVal){
if(providers.length < 1){
return Promise.resolve(null)
}
return providers.reduce((a,b) => a.then(b), providers.shift()(initialVal));
};
and then call it like:
inSeries(providers, 1).then(v => {
console.log(v); // 7
});
Using modern ES:
const series = async (tasks) => {
const results = [];
for (const task of tasks) {
const result = await task;
results.push(result);
}
return results;
};
//...
const readFiles = await series(files.map(readFile));
Most of the answers dont include the results of ALL promises individually, so in case someone is looking for this particular behaviour, this is a possible solution using recursion.
It follows the style of Promise.all:
Returns the array of results in the .then() callback.
If some promise fails, its returned immediately in the .catch() callback.
const promiseEach = (arrayOfTasks) => {
let results = []
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
const resolveNext = (arrayOfTasks) => {
// If all tasks are already resolved, return the final array of results
if (arrayOfTasks.length === 0) return resolve(results)
// Extract first promise and solve it
const first = arrayOfTasks.shift()
first().then((res) => {
results.push(res)
resolveNext(arrayOfTasks)
}).catch((err) => {
reject(err)
})
}
resolveNext(arrayOfTasks)
})
}
// Lets try it 😎
const promise = (time, shouldThrowError) => new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
const timeInMs = time * 1000
setTimeout(()=>{
console.log(`Waited ${time} secs`)
if (shouldThrowError) reject(new Error('Promise failed'))
resolve(time)
}, timeInMs)
})
const tasks = [() => promise(1), () => promise(2)]
promiseEach(tasks)
.then((res) => {
console.log(res) // [1, 2]
})
// Oops some promise failed
.catch((error) => {
console.log(error)
})
Note about the tasks array declaration:
In this case is not possible to use the following notation like Promise.all would use:
const tasks = [promise(1), promise(2)]
And we have to use:
const tasks = [() => promise(1), () => promise(2)]
The reason is that JavaScript starts executing the promise immediatelly after its declared. If we use methods like Promise.all, it just checks that the state of all of them is fulfilled or rejected, but doesnt start the exection itself. Using () => promise() we stop the execution until its called.
You can use this function that gets promiseFactories List:
function executeSequentially(promiseFactories) {
var result = Promise.resolve();
promiseFactories.forEach(function (promiseFactory) {
result = result.then(promiseFactory);
});
return result;
}
Promise Factory is just simple function that returns a Promise:
function myPromiseFactory() {
return somethingThatCreatesAPromise();
}
It works because a promise factory doesn't create the promise until it's asked to. It works the same way as a then function – in fact, it's the same thing!
You don't want to operate over an array of promises at all. Per the Promise spec, as soon as a promise is created, it begins executing. So what you really want is an array of promise factories...
If you want to learn more on Promises, you should check this link:
https://pouchdb.com/2015/05/18/we-have-a-problem-with-promises.html
If you want you can use reduce to make a sequential promise, for example:
[2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9].reduce((promises, page) => {
return promises.then((page) => {
console.log(page);
return Promise.resolve(page+1);
});
}, Promise.resolve(1));
it'll always works in sequential.
I really liked #joelnet's answer, but to me, that style of coding is a little bit tough to digest, so I spent a couple of days trying to figure out how I would express the same solution in a more readable manner and this is my take, just with a different syntax and some comments.
// first take your work
const urls = ['/url1', '/url2', '/url3', '/url4']
// next convert each item to a function that returns a promise
const functions = urls.map((url) => {
// For every url we return a new function
return () => {
return new Promise((resolve) => {
// random wait in milliseconds
const randomWait = parseInt((Math.random() * 1000),10)
console.log('waiting to resolve in ms', randomWait)
setTimeout(()=>resolve({randomWait, url}),randomWait)
})
}
})
const promiseReduce = (acc, next) => {
// we wait for the accumulator to resolve it's promise
return acc.then((accResult) => {
// and then we return a new promise that will become
// the new value for the accumulator
return next().then((nextResult) => {
// that eventually will resolve to a new array containing
// the value of the two promises
return accResult.concat(nextResult)
})
})
};
// the accumulator will always be a promise that resolves to an array
const accumulator = Promise.resolve([])
// we call reduce with the reduce function and the accumulator initial value
functions.reduce(promiseReduce, accumulator)
.then((result) => {
// let's display the final value here
console.log('=== The final result ===')
console.log(result)
})
As Bergi noticed, I think the best and clear solution is use BlueBird.each, code below:
const BlueBird = require('bluebird');
BlueBird.each(files, fs.readFileAsync);
I find myself coming back to this question many times and the answers aren't exactly giving me what I need, so putting this here for anyone that needs this too.
The code below does sequential promises execution (one after another), and each round consists of multiple callings:
async function sequence(list, cb) {
const result = [];
await list.reduce(async (promise, item) => promise
.then(() => cb(item))
.then((res) => result.push(res)
), Promise.resolve());
return result;
}
Showcase:
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/axios/0.15.3/axios.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://unpkg.com/#babel/standalone#7/babel.min.js"></script>
<script type="text/babel">
function sleep(ms) {
return new Promise(resolve => setTimeout(resolve, ms));
}
async function readFile(url, index) {
console.log('Running index: ', index);
// First action
const firstTime = await axios.get(url);
console.log('First API response: ', firstTime.data.activity);
// Second action
await sleep(1000);
// Third action
const secondTime = await axios.get(url);
console.log('Second API response: ', secondTime.data.activity);
// Fourth action
await sleep(1000);
return secondTime.data;
}
async function sequence(urls, fn) {
const result = [];
await urls.reduce(async (promise, url, index) => promise.then(() => fn(url, index)).then((res) => result.push(res)), Promise.resolve());
return result;
}
const urls = [
'https://www.boredapi.com/api/activity',
'https://www.boredapi.com/api/activity',
'https://www.boredapi.com/api/activity',
];
(async function init() {
const result = await sequence(urls, readFile);
console.log('result', result);
})()
</script>
I use the following code to extend the Promise object. It handles rejection of the promises and returns an array of results
Code
/*
Runs tasks in sequence and resolves a promise upon finish
tasks: an array of functions that return a promise upon call.
parameters: an array of arrays corresponding to the parameters to be passed on each function call.
context: Object to use as context to call each function. (The 'this' keyword that may be used inside the function definition)
*/
Promise.sequence = function(tasks, parameters = [], context = null) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject)=>{
var nextTask = tasks.splice(0,1)[0].apply(context, parameters[0]); //Dequeue and call the first task
var output = new Array(tasks.length + 1);
var errorFlag = false;
tasks.forEach((task, index) => {
nextTask = nextTask.then(r => {
output[index] = r;
return task.apply(context, parameters[index+1]);
}, e=>{
output[index] = e;
errorFlag = true;
return task.apply(context, parameters[index+1]);
});
});
// Last task
nextTask.then(r=>{
output[output.length - 1] = r;
if (errorFlag) reject(output); else resolve(output);
})
.catch(e=>{
output[output.length - 1] = e;
reject(output);
});
});
};
Example
function functionThatReturnsAPromise(n) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject)=>{
//Emulating real life delays, like a web request
setTimeout(()=>{
resolve(n);
}, 1000);
});
}
var arrayOfArguments = [['a'],['b'],['c'],['d']];
var arrayOfFunctions = (new Array(4)).fill(functionThatReturnsAPromise);
Promise.sequence(arrayOfFunctions, arrayOfArguments)
.then(console.log)
.catch(console.error);
Your approach is not bad, but it does have two issues: it swallows errors and it employs the Explicit Promise Construction Antipattern.
You can solve both of these issues, and make the code cleaner, while still employing the same general strategy:
var Q = require("q");
var readFile = function(file) {
... // Returns a promise.
};
var readFiles = function(files) {
var readSequential = function(index) {
if (index < files.length) {
return readFile(files[index]).then(function() {
return readSequential(index + 1);
});
}
};
// using Promise.resolve() here in case files.length is 0
return Promise.resolve(readSequential(0)); // Start!
};
This is my sequentially implementation that I use in various projects:
const file = [file1, file2, file3];
const fileContents = sequentially(readFile, files);
// somewhere else in the code:
export const sequentially = async <T, P>(
toPromise: (element: T) => Promise<P>,
elements: T[]
): Promise<P[]> => {
const results: P[] = [];
await elements.reduce(async (sequence, element) => {
await sequence;
results.push(await toPromise(element));
}, Promise.resolve());
return results;
};
Here is my Angular/TypeScript approach, using RxJS:
Given an array of URL strings, convert it into an Observable using the from function.
Use pipe to wrap the Ajax request, immediate response logic, any desired delay, and error handling.
Inside of the pipe, use concatMap to serialize the requests. Otherwise, using Javascript forEach or map would make the requests at the same time.
Use RxJS ajax to make the call, and also to add any desired delay after each call returns.
Working example: https://stackblitz.com/edit/rxjs-bnrkix?file=index.ts
The code looks like this (I left in some extras so you can choose what to keep or discard):
import { ajax } from 'rxjs/ajax';
import { catchError, concatMap, delay, from, of, map, Observable } from 'rxjs';
const urls = [
'https://randomuser.me/api/',
'https://randomuser.me/api/',
'https://randomuser.me/api/',
];
const delayAfterCall = 500;
from(urls)
.pipe(
concatMap((url: string) => {
return ajax.getJSON(url).pipe(
map((response) => {
console.log('Done! Received:', response);
return response;
}),
catchError((error) => {
console.error('Error: ', error);
return of(error);
}),
delay(delayAfterCall)
);
})
)
.subscribe((response) => {
console.log('received email:', response.results[0].email);
});
On the basis of the question's title, "Resolve promises one after another (i.e. in sequence)?", we might understand that the OP is more interested in the sequential handling of promises on settlement than sequential calls per se.
This answer is offered :
to demonstrate that sequential calls are not necessary for sequential handling of responses.
to expose viable alternative patterns to this page's visitors - including the OP if he is still interested over a year later.
despite the OP's assertion that he does not want to make calls concurrently, which may genuinely be the case but equally may be an assumption based on the desire for sequential handling of responses as the title implies.
If concurrent calls are genuinely not wanted then see Benjamin Gruenbaum's answer which covers sequential calls (etc) comprehensively.
If however, you are interested (for improved performance) in patterns which allow concurrent calls followed by sequential handling of responses, then please read on.
It's tempting to think you have to use Promise.all(arr.map(fn)).then(fn) (as I have done many times) or a Promise lib's fancy sugar (notably Bluebird's), however (with credit to this article) an arr.map(fn).reduce(fn) pattern will do the job, with the advantages that it :
works with any promise lib - even pre-compliant versions of jQuery - only .then() is used.
affords the flexibility to skip-over-error or stop-on-error, whichever you want with a one line mod.
Here it is, written for Q.
var readFiles = function(files) {
return files.map(readFile) //Make calls in parallel.
.reduce(function(sequence, filePromise) {
return sequence.then(function() {
return filePromise;
}).then(function(file) {
//Do stuff with file ... in the correct sequence!
}, function(error) {
console.log(error); //optional
return sequence;//skip-over-error. To stop-on-error, `return error` (jQuery), or `throw error` (Promises/A+).
});
}, Q()).then(function() {
// all done.
});
};
Note: only that one fragment, Q(), is specific to Q. For jQuery you need to ensure that readFile() returns a jQuery promise. With A+ libs, foreign promises will be assimilated.
The key here is the reduction's sequence promise, which sequences the handling of the readFile promises but not their creation.
And once you have absorbed that, it's maybe slightly mind-blowing when you realise that the .map() stage isn't actually necessary! The whole job, parallel calls plus serial handling in the correct order, can be achieved with reduce() alone, plus the added advantage of further flexibility to :
convert from parallel async calls to serial async calls by simply moving one line - potentially useful during development.
Here it is, for Q again.
var readFiles = function(files) {
return files.reduce(function(sequence, f) {
var filePromise = readFile(f);//Make calls in parallel. To call sequentially, move this line down one.
return sequence.then(function() {
return filePromise;
}).then(function(file) {
//Do stuff with file ... in the correct sequence!
}, function(error) {
console.log(error); //optional
return sequence;//Skip over any errors. To stop-on-error, `return error` (jQuery), or `throw error` (Promises/A+).
});
}, Q()).then(function() {
// all done.
});
};
That's the basic pattern. If you wanted also to deliver data (eg the files or some transform of them) to the caller, you would need a mild variant.
If someone else needs a guaranteed way of STRICTLY sequential way of resolving Promises when performing CRUD operations you also can use the following code as a basis.
As long as you add 'return' before calling each function, describing a Promise, and use this example as a basis the next .then() function call will CONSISTENTLY start after the completion of the previous one:
getRidOfOlderShoutsPromise = () => {
return readShoutsPromise('BEFORE')
.then(() => {
return deleteOlderShoutsPromise();
})
.then(() => {
return readShoutsPromise('AFTER')
})
.catch(err => console.log(err.message));
}
deleteOlderShoutsPromise = () => {
return new Promise ( (resolve, reject) => {
console.log("in deleteOlderShouts");
let d = new Date();
let TwoMinuteAgo = d - 1000 * 90 ;
All_Shouts.deleteMany({ dateTime: {$lt: TwoMinuteAgo}}, function(err) {
if (err) reject();
console.log("DELETED OLDs at "+d);
resolve();
});
});
}
readShoutsPromise = (tex) => {
return new Promise( (resolve, reject) => {
console.log("in readShoutsPromise -"+tex);
All_Shouts
.find({})
.sort([['dateTime', 'ascending']])
.exec(function (err, data){
if (err) reject();
let d = new Date();
console.log("shouts "+tex+" delete PROMISE = "+data.length +"; date ="+d);
resolve(data);
});
});
}
Array push and pop method can be used for sequence of promises. You can also push new promises when you need additional data. This is the code, I will use in React Infinite loader to load sequence of pages.
var promises = [Promise.resolve()];
function methodThatReturnsAPromise(page) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => {
console.log(`Resolve-${page}! ${new Date()} `);
resolve();
}, 1000);
});
}
function pushPromise(page) {
promises.push(promises.pop().then(function () {
return methodThatReturnsAPromise(page)
}));
}
pushPromise(1);
pushPromise(2);
pushPromise(3);
(function() {
function sleep(ms) {
return new Promise(function(resolve) {
setTimeout(function() {
return resolve();
}, ms);
});
}
function serial(arr, index, results) {
if (index == arr.length) {
return Promise.resolve(results);
}
return new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
if (!index) {
index = 0;
results = [];
}
return arr[index]()
.then(function(d) {
return resolve(d);
})
.catch(function(err) {
return reject(err);
});
})
.then(function(result) {
console.log("here");
results.push(result);
return serial(arr, index + 1, results);
})
.catch(function(err) {
throw err;
});
}
const a = [5000, 5000, 5000];
serial(a.map(x => () => sleep(x)));
})();
Here the key is how you call the sleep function. You need to pass an array of functions which itself returns a promise instead of an array of promises.

Conditional/dynamic array promise all

I have a function with an array of promises, that array can have from 1 to X promises.
Those promises enter into the array based on conditionals.
I want to be able to distinguish from which API comes each result, and I can't realise a clean way to do it
let promises = [];
if (false) {
let promise1 = request(toUrl);
promises.push(promise1);
}
if (true) {
let promise2 = request(toUrl);
promises.push(promise2);
}
if (false) {
let promise3 = request(toUrl);
promises.push(promise3);
}
if (true) {
let promise4 = request(toUrl);
promises.push(promise4);
}
try {
let result = await Promise.all(promises);
} catch (error) {
console.log(error);
}
So, if everything goes ok result will be an array of results. Not knowing which one of the conditionals was true, how do I know if result[0] is the result of promise1, promise2 or promise3?
You can just add to the response of your request(url) another information about the promise like
const promise1 = request(url).then(res => ({ res: res, promise: 'promise1' }))
and at the Promise.all() you will get values of the promises in the above form and can detect which promises were resolved.
Example
const promises = [];
if(true) {
const promise1 = fetch('https://jsonplaceholder.typicode.com/posts/1').then(res => ({ res: res, promise: 'promise1' }));
promises.push(promise1);
}
if(false) {
const promise2 = fetch('https://jsonplaceholder.typicode.com/posts/2').then(res => ({ res: res, promise: 'promise2' }));
promises.push(promise2);
}
Promise.all(promises).then(res => console.log(res));
In my opinion we can simplify the complexity of the problem by using following code -
let promises = [];
let truthyValue = true,
falsyvalue = true;
let [promise1, promise2, promise3, promise4] = await Promise.all([
truthyValue ? request(toUrl) : Promise.resolve({}),
truthyValue ? request(toUrl) : Promise.resolve({}),
falsyValue ? request(toUrl) : Promise.resolve({}),
falsyValue ? request(toUrl) : Promise.resolve({})
]);
// promise1 will be called only when truthyValue is set
if (promise1) {
// do something
}
// promise2 will be called only when truthyValue is set
if (promise2) {
// do something
}
// promise3 will be called only when falsyValue is set
if (promise3) {
// do something
}
// promise4 will be called only when falsyValue is set
if (promise4) {
// do something
}
I used an object map of promises with a name key in order to identify which resolve corresponds to which promise.
const promises = {};
const mapResolveToPromise = res => Object.fromEntries(
Object.entries(promises).map(([key], index) => [key, res[index]])
);
promises.promise1 = fetch('https://jsonplaceholder.typicode.com/posts/1');
promises.promise2 = fetch('https://jsonplaceholder.typicode.com/posts/2');
Promise.all(Object.values(promises))
.then(mapResolveToPromise)
.then(res => {
console.log(res.promise1.url);
console.log(res.promise2.url);
});
I had a similar problem, always a different quantity of async functions to call.
What I didn't want was to start the promises work before promise.all().
So I collected function pointers in an array.
eg:
async function first() {
return new Promise((resolve)=> setTimeout(resolve,1000,99));
}
async function second() {
return new Promise((resolve)=> setTimeout(resolve,1500,100));
}
let x = [first, second];
// x is transformed into an array with then executed functions
await Promise.all(x.map(x=>x()))
Result is:
[
99,
100
]
hopefully this helps and I understood the mentioned problem ... :)
Why all the pushes, you can construct arrays inline.
doPromiseStuff = async ({ thing = true }) => {
const urls = ['', '', '', ''];
return await Promise.all([
thing ? request(urls[1]) : request(urls[2]),
thing ? request(urls[3]) : request(urls[4])
]);
}

Resolve promises one after another (i.e. in sequence)?

Consider the following code that reads an array of files in a serial/sequential manner. readFiles returns a promise, which is resolved only once all files have been read in sequence.
var readFile = function(file) {
... // Returns a promise.
};
var readFiles = function(files) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
var readSequential = function(index) {
if (index >= files.length) {
resolve();
} else {
readFile(files[index]).then(function() {
readSequential(index + 1);
}).catch(reject);
}
};
readSequential(0); // Start with the first file!
});
};
The above code works, but I don't like having to do recursion for things to occur sequentially. Is there a simpler way that this code can be re-written so that I don't have to use my weird readSequential function?
Originally I tried to use Promise.all, but that caused all of the readFile calls to happen concurrently, which is not what I want:
var readFiles = function(files) {
return Promise.all(files.map(function(file) {
return readFile(file);
}));
};
Update 2017: I would use an async function if the environment supports it:
async function readFiles(files) {
for(const file of files) {
await readFile(file);
}
};
If you'd like, you can defer reading the files until you need them using an async generator (if your environment supports it):
async function* readFiles(files) {
for(const file of files) {
yield await readFile(file);
}
};
Update: In second thought - I might use a for loop instead:
var readFiles = function(files) {
var p = Promise.resolve(); // Q() in q
files.forEach(file =>
p = p.then(() => readFile(file));
);
return p;
};
Or more compactly, with reduce:
var readFiles = function(files) {
return files.reduce((p, file) => {
return p.then(() => readFile(file));
}, Promise.resolve()); // initial
};
In other promise libraries (like when and Bluebird) you have utility methods for this.
For example, Bluebird would be:
var Promise = require("bluebird");
var fs = Promise.promisifyAll(require("fs"));
var readAll = Promise.resolve(files).map(fs.readFileAsync,{concurrency: 1 });
// if the order matters, you can use Promise.each instead and omit concurrency param
readAll.then(function(allFileContents){
// do stuff to read files.
});
Although there is really no reason not to use async await today.
Here is how I prefer to run tasks in series.
function runSerial() {
var that = this;
// task1 is a function that returns a promise (and immediately starts executing)
// task2 is a function that returns a promise (and immediately starts executing)
return Promise.resolve()
.then(function() {
return that.task1();
})
.then(function() {
return that.task2();
})
.then(function() {
console.log(" ---- done ----");
});
}
What about cases with more tasks? Like, 10?
function runSerial(tasks) {
var result = Promise.resolve();
tasks.forEach(task => {
result = result.then(() => task());
});
return result;
}
This question is old, but we live in a world of ES6 and functional JavaScript, so let's see how we can improve.
Because promises execute immediately, we can't just create an array of promises, they would all fire off in parallel.
Instead, we need to create an array of functions that returns a promise. Each function will then be executed sequentially, which then starts the promise inside.
We can solve this a few ways, but my favorite way is to use reduce.
It gets a little tricky using reduce in combination with promises, so I have broken down the one liner into some smaller digestible bites below.
The essence of this function is to use reduce starting with an initial value of Promise.resolve([]), or a promise containing an empty array.
This promise will then be passed into the reduce method as promise. This is the key to chaining each promise together sequentially. The next promise to execute is func and when the then fires, the results are concatenated and that promise is then returned, executing the reduce cycle with the next promise function.
Once all promises have executed, the returned promise will contain an array of all the results of each promise.
ES6 Example (one liner)
/*
* serial executes Promises sequentially.
* #param {funcs} An array of funcs that return promises.
* #example
* const urls = ['/url1', '/url2', '/url3']
* serial(urls.map(url => () => $.ajax(url)))
* .then(console.log.bind(console))
*/
const serial = funcs =>
funcs.reduce((promise, func) =>
promise.then(result => func().then(Array.prototype.concat.bind(result))), Promise.resolve([]))
ES6 Example (broken down)
// broken down to for easier understanding
const concat = list => Array.prototype.concat.bind(list)
const promiseConcat = f => x => f().then(concat(x))
const promiseReduce = (acc, x) => acc.then(promiseConcat(x))
/*
* serial executes Promises sequentially.
* #param {funcs} An array of funcs that return promises.
* #example
* const urls = ['/url1', '/url2', '/url3']
* serial(urls.map(url => () => $.ajax(url)))
* .then(console.log.bind(console))
*/
const serial = funcs => funcs.reduce(promiseReduce, Promise.resolve([]))
Usage:
// first take your work
const urls = ['/url1', '/url2', '/url3', '/url4']
// next convert each item to a function that returns a promise
const funcs = urls.map(url => () => $.ajax(url))
// execute them serially
serial(funcs)
.then(console.log.bind(console))
To do this simply in ES6:
function(files) {
// Create a new empty promise (don't do that with real people ;)
var sequence = Promise.resolve();
// Loop over each file, and add on a promise to the
// end of the 'sequence' promise.
files.forEach(file => {
// Chain one computation onto the sequence
sequence =
sequence
.then(() => performComputation(file))
.then(result => doSomething(result));
// Resolves for each file, one at a time.
})
// This will resolve after the entire chain is resolved
return sequence;
}
Addition example
const addTwo = async () => 2;
const addThree = async (inValue) => new Promise((resolve) => setTimeout(resolve(inValue + 3), 2000));
const addFour = (inValue) => new Promise((res) => setTimeout(res(inValue + 4), 1000));
const addFive = async (inValue) => inValue + 5;
// Function which handles promises from above
async function sequenceAddition() {
let sum = await [addTwo, addThree, addFour, addFive].reduce(
(promise, currPromise) => promise.then((val) => currPromise(val)),
Promise.resolve()
);
console.log('sum:', sum); // 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 = 14
}
// Run function. See console for result.
sequenceAddition();
General syntax to use reduce()
function sequence(tasks, fn) {
return tasks.reduce((promise, task) => promise.then(() => fn(task)), Promise.resolve());
}
UPDATE
items-promise is a ready to use NPM package doing the same.
I've had to run a lot of sequential tasks and used these answers to forge a function that would take care of handling any sequential task...
function one_by_one(objects_array, iterator, callback) {
var start_promise = objects_array.reduce(function (prom, object) {
return prom.then(function () {
return iterator(object);
});
}, Promise.resolve()); // initial
if(callback){
start_promise.then(callback);
}else{
return start_promise;
}
}
The function takes 2 arguments + 1 optional. First argument is the array on which we will be working. The second argument is the task itself, a function that returns a promise, the next task will be started only when this promise resolves. The third argument is a callback to run when all tasks have been done. If no callback is passed, then the function returns the promise it created so we can handle the end.
Here's an example of usage:
var filenames = ['1.jpg','2.jpg','3.jpg'];
var resize_task = function(filename){
//return promise of async resizing with filename
};
one_by_one(filenames,resize_task );
Hope it saves someone some time...
With Async/Await (if you have the support of ES7)
function downloadFile(fileUrl) { ... } // This function return a Promise
async function main()
{
var filesList = [...];
for (const file of filesList) {
await downloadFile(file);
}
}
(you must use for loop, and not forEach because async/await has problems running in forEach loop)
Without Async/Await (using Promise)
function downloadFile(fileUrl) { ... } // This function return a Promise
function downloadRecursion(filesList, index)
{
index = index || 0;
if (index < filesList.length)
{
downloadFile(filesList[index]).then(function()
{
index++;
downloadRecursion(filesList, index); // self invocation - recursion!
});
}
else
{
return Promise.resolve();
}
}
function main()
{
var filesList = [...];
downloadRecursion(filesList);
}
My preferred solution:
function processArray(arr, fn) {
return arr.reduce(
(p, v) => p.then((a) => fn(v).then(r => a.concat([r]))),
Promise.resolve([])
);
}
It's not fundamentally different from others published here but:
Applies the function to items in series
Resolves to an array of results
Doesn't require async/await (support is still quite limited, circa 2017)
Uses arrow functions; nice and concise
Example usage:
const numbers = [0, 4, 20, 100];
const multiplyBy3 = (x) => new Promise(res => res(x * 3));
// Prints [ 0, 12, 60, 300 ]
processArray(numbers, multiplyBy3).then(console.log);
Tested on reasonable current Chrome (v59) and NodeJS (v8.1.2).
First, you need to understand that a promise is executed at the time of creation.
So for example if you have a code:
["a","b","c"].map(x => returnsPromise(x))
You need to change it to:
["a","b","c"].map(x => () => returnsPromise(x))
Then we need to sequentially chain promises:
["a", "b", "c"].map(x => () => returnsPromise(x))
.reduce(
(before, after) => before.then(_ => after()),
Promise.resolve()
)
executing after(), will make sure that promise is created (and executed) only when its time comes.
Nicest solution that I was able to figure out was with bluebird promises. You can just do Promise.resolve(files).each(fs.readFileAsync); which guarantees that promises are resolved sequentially in order.
With async/await of ES2016 (and maybe some features of ES2018), this can be reduced to this form:
function readFile(file) {
... // Returns a promise.
}
async function readFiles(files) {
for (file in files) {
await readFile(file)
}
}
I haven't seen another answer express that simplicity. The OP said parallel execution of readFile was not desired. However, with IO like this it really makes sense to not be blocking on a single file read, while keeping the loop execution synchronous (you don't want to do the next step until all files have been read). Since I just learned about this and am a bit excited about it, I'll share that approach of parallel asynchronous execution of readFile with overall synchronous execution of readFiles.
async function readFiles(files) {
await Promise.all(files.map(readFile))
}
Isn't that a thing of beauty?
This is a slight variation of another answer above. Using native Promises:
function inSequence(tasks) {
return tasks.reduce((p, task) => p.then(task), Promise.resolve())
}
Explanation
If you have these tasks [t1, t2, t3], then the above is equivalent to Promise.resolve().then(t1).then(t2).then(t3). It's the behavior of reduce.
How to use
First You need to construct a list of tasks! A task is a function that accepts no argument. If you need to pass arguments to your function, then use bind or other methods to create a task. For example:
var tasks = files.map(file => processFile.bind(null, file))
inSequence(tasks).then(...)
I created this simple method on the Promise object:
Create and add a Promise.sequence method to the Promise object
Promise.sequence = function (chain) {
var results = [];
var entries = chain;
if (entries.entries) entries = entries.entries();
return new Promise(function (yes, no) {
var next = function () {
var entry = entries.next();
if(entry.done) yes(results);
else {
results.push(entry.value[1]().then(next, function() { no(results); } ));
}
};
next();
});
};
Usage:
var todo = [];
todo.push(firstPromise);
if (someCriterium) todo.push(optionalPromise);
todo.push(lastPromise);
// Invoking them
Promise.sequence(todo)
.then(function(results) {}, function(results) {});
The best thing about this extension to the Promise object, is that it is consistent with the style of promises. Promise.all and Promise.sequence is invoked the same way, but have different semantics.
Caution
Sequential running of promises is not usually a very good way to use promises. It's usually better to use Promise.all, and let the browser run the code as fast as possible. However, there are real use cases for it - for example when writing a mobile app using javascript.
My answer based on https://stackoverflow.com/a/31070150/7542429.
Promise.series = function series(arrayOfPromises) {
var results = [];
return arrayOfPromises.reduce(function(seriesPromise, promise) {
return seriesPromise.then(function() {
return promise
.then(function(result) {
results.push(result);
});
});
}, Promise.resolve())
.then(function() {
return results;
});
};
This solution returns the results as an array like Promise.all().
Usage:
Promise.series([array of promises])
.then(function(results) {
// do stuff with results here
});
Use Array.prototype.reduce, and remember to wrap your promises in a function otherwise they will already be running!
// array of Promise providers
const providers = [
function(){
return Promise.resolve(1);
},
function(){
return Promise.resolve(2);
},
function(){
return Promise.resolve(3);
}
]
const inSeries = function(providers){
const seed = Promise.resolve(null);
return providers.reduce(function(a,b){
return a.then(b);
}, seed);
};
nice and easy...
you should be able to re-use the same seed for performance, etc.
It's important to guard against empty arrays or arrays with only 1 element when using reduce, so this technique is your best bet:
const providers = [
function(v){
return Promise.resolve(v+1);
},
function(v){
return Promise.resolve(v+2);
},
function(v){
return Promise.resolve(v+3);
}
]
const inSeries = function(providers, initialVal){
if(providers.length < 1){
return Promise.resolve(null)
}
return providers.reduce((a,b) => a.then(b), providers.shift()(initialVal));
};
and then call it like:
inSeries(providers, 1).then(v => {
console.log(v); // 7
});
Using modern ES:
const series = async (tasks) => {
const results = [];
for (const task of tasks) {
const result = await task;
results.push(result);
}
return results;
};
//...
const readFiles = await series(files.map(readFile));
Most of the answers dont include the results of ALL promises individually, so in case someone is looking for this particular behaviour, this is a possible solution using recursion.
It follows the style of Promise.all:
Returns the array of results in the .then() callback.
If some promise fails, its returned immediately in the .catch() callback.
const promiseEach = (arrayOfTasks) => {
let results = []
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
const resolveNext = (arrayOfTasks) => {
// If all tasks are already resolved, return the final array of results
if (arrayOfTasks.length === 0) return resolve(results)
// Extract first promise and solve it
const first = arrayOfTasks.shift()
first().then((res) => {
results.push(res)
resolveNext(arrayOfTasks)
}).catch((err) => {
reject(err)
})
}
resolveNext(arrayOfTasks)
})
}
// Lets try it 😎
const promise = (time, shouldThrowError) => new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
const timeInMs = time * 1000
setTimeout(()=>{
console.log(`Waited ${time} secs`)
if (shouldThrowError) reject(new Error('Promise failed'))
resolve(time)
}, timeInMs)
})
const tasks = [() => promise(1), () => promise(2)]
promiseEach(tasks)
.then((res) => {
console.log(res) // [1, 2]
})
// Oops some promise failed
.catch((error) => {
console.log(error)
})
Note about the tasks array declaration:
In this case is not possible to use the following notation like Promise.all would use:
const tasks = [promise(1), promise(2)]
And we have to use:
const tasks = [() => promise(1), () => promise(2)]
The reason is that JavaScript starts executing the promise immediatelly after its declared. If we use methods like Promise.all, it just checks that the state of all of them is fulfilled or rejected, but doesnt start the exection itself. Using () => promise() we stop the execution until its called.
You can use this function that gets promiseFactories List:
function executeSequentially(promiseFactories) {
var result = Promise.resolve();
promiseFactories.forEach(function (promiseFactory) {
result = result.then(promiseFactory);
});
return result;
}
Promise Factory is just simple function that returns a Promise:
function myPromiseFactory() {
return somethingThatCreatesAPromise();
}
It works because a promise factory doesn't create the promise until it's asked to. It works the same way as a then function – in fact, it's the same thing!
You don't want to operate over an array of promises at all. Per the Promise spec, as soon as a promise is created, it begins executing. So what you really want is an array of promise factories...
If you want to learn more on Promises, you should check this link:
https://pouchdb.com/2015/05/18/we-have-a-problem-with-promises.html
If you want you can use reduce to make a sequential promise, for example:
[2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9].reduce((promises, page) => {
return promises.then((page) => {
console.log(page);
return Promise.resolve(page+1);
});
}, Promise.resolve(1));
it'll always works in sequential.
I really liked #joelnet's answer, but to me, that style of coding is a little bit tough to digest, so I spent a couple of days trying to figure out how I would express the same solution in a more readable manner and this is my take, just with a different syntax and some comments.
// first take your work
const urls = ['/url1', '/url2', '/url3', '/url4']
// next convert each item to a function that returns a promise
const functions = urls.map((url) => {
// For every url we return a new function
return () => {
return new Promise((resolve) => {
// random wait in milliseconds
const randomWait = parseInt((Math.random() * 1000),10)
console.log('waiting to resolve in ms', randomWait)
setTimeout(()=>resolve({randomWait, url}),randomWait)
})
}
})
const promiseReduce = (acc, next) => {
// we wait for the accumulator to resolve it's promise
return acc.then((accResult) => {
// and then we return a new promise that will become
// the new value for the accumulator
return next().then((nextResult) => {
// that eventually will resolve to a new array containing
// the value of the two promises
return accResult.concat(nextResult)
})
})
};
// the accumulator will always be a promise that resolves to an array
const accumulator = Promise.resolve([])
// we call reduce with the reduce function and the accumulator initial value
functions.reduce(promiseReduce, accumulator)
.then((result) => {
// let's display the final value here
console.log('=== The final result ===')
console.log(result)
})
As Bergi noticed, I think the best and clear solution is use BlueBird.each, code below:
const BlueBird = require('bluebird');
BlueBird.each(files, fs.readFileAsync);
I find myself coming back to this question many times and the answers aren't exactly giving me what I need, so putting this here for anyone that needs this too.
The code below does sequential promises execution (one after another), and each round consists of multiple callings:
async function sequence(list, cb) {
const result = [];
await list.reduce(async (promise, item) => promise
.then(() => cb(item))
.then((res) => result.push(res)
), Promise.resolve());
return result;
}
Showcase:
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/axios/0.15.3/axios.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://unpkg.com/#babel/standalone#7/babel.min.js"></script>
<script type="text/babel">
function sleep(ms) {
return new Promise(resolve => setTimeout(resolve, ms));
}
async function readFile(url, index) {
console.log('Running index: ', index);
// First action
const firstTime = await axios.get(url);
console.log('First API response: ', firstTime.data.activity);
// Second action
await sleep(1000);
// Third action
const secondTime = await axios.get(url);
console.log('Second API response: ', secondTime.data.activity);
// Fourth action
await sleep(1000);
return secondTime.data;
}
async function sequence(urls, fn) {
const result = [];
await urls.reduce(async (promise, url, index) => promise.then(() => fn(url, index)).then((res) => result.push(res)), Promise.resolve());
return result;
}
const urls = [
'https://www.boredapi.com/api/activity',
'https://www.boredapi.com/api/activity',
'https://www.boredapi.com/api/activity',
];
(async function init() {
const result = await sequence(urls, readFile);
console.log('result', result);
})()
</script>
I use the following code to extend the Promise object. It handles rejection of the promises and returns an array of results
Code
/*
Runs tasks in sequence and resolves a promise upon finish
tasks: an array of functions that return a promise upon call.
parameters: an array of arrays corresponding to the parameters to be passed on each function call.
context: Object to use as context to call each function. (The 'this' keyword that may be used inside the function definition)
*/
Promise.sequence = function(tasks, parameters = [], context = null) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject)=>{
var nextTask = tasks.splice(0,1)[0].apply(context, parameters[0]); //Dequeue and call the first task
var output = new Array(tasks.length + 1);
var errorFlag = false;
tasks.forEach((task, index) => {
nextTask = nextTask.then(r => {
output[index] = r;
return task.apply(context, parameters[index+1]);
}, e=>{
output[index] = e;
errorFlag = true;
return task.apply(context, parameters[index+1]);
});
});
// Last task
nextTask.then(r=>{
output[output.length - 1] = r;
if (errorFlag) reject(output); else resolve(output);
})
.catch(e=>{
output[output.length - 1] = e;
reject(output);
});
});
};
Example
function functionThatReturnsAPromise(n) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject)=>{
//Emulating real life delays, like a web request
setTimeout(()=>{
resolve(n);
}, 1000);
});
}
var arrayOfArguments = [['a'],['b'],['c'],['d']];
var arrayOfFunctions = (new Array(4)).fill(functionThatReturnsAPromise);
Promise.sequence(arrayOfFunctions, arrayOfArguments)
.then(console.log)
.catch(console.error);
Your approach is not bad, but it does have two issues: it swallows errors and it employs the Explicit Promise Construction Antipattern.
You can solve both of these issues, and make the code cleaner, while still employing the same general strategy:
var Q = require("q");
var readFile = function(file) {
... // Returns a promise.
};
var readFiles = function(files) {
var readSequential = function(index) {
if (index < files.length) {
return readFile(files[index]).then(function() {
return readSequential(index + 1);
});
}
};
// using Promise.resolve() here in case files.length is 0
return Promise.resolve(readSequential(0)); // Start!
};
This is my sequentially implementation that I use in various projects:
const file = [file1, file2, file3];
const fileContents = sequentially(readFile, files);
// somewhere else in the code:
export const sequentially = async <T, P>(
toPromise: (element: T) => Promise<P>,
elements: T[]
): Promise<P[]> => {
const results: P[] = [];
await elements.reduce(async (sequence, element) => {
await sequence;
results.push(await toPromise(element));
}, Promise.resolve());
return results;
};
Here is my Angular/TypeScript approach, using RxJS:
Given an array of URL strings, convert it into an Observable using the from function.
Use pipe to wrap the Ajax request, immediate response logic, any desired delay, and error handling.
Inside of the pipe, use concatMap to serialize the requests. Otherwise, using Javascript forEach or map would make the requests at the same time.
Use RxJS ajax to make the call, and also to add any desired delay after each call returns.
Working example: https://stackblitz.com/edit/rxjs-bnrkix?file=index.ts
The code looks like this (I left in some extras so you can choose what to keep or discard):
import { ajax } from 'rxjs/ajax';
import { catchError, concatMap, delay, from, of, map, Observable } from 'rxjs';
const urls = [
'https://randomuser.me/api/',
'https://randomuser.me/api/',
'https://randomuser.me/api/',
];
const delayAfterCall = 500;
from(urls)
.pipe(
concatMap((url: string) => {
return ajax.getJSON(url).pipe(
map((response) => {
console.log('Done! Received:', response);
return response;
}),
catchError((error) => {
console.error('Error: ', error);
return of(error);
}),
delay(delayAfterCall)
);
})
)
.subscribe((response) => {
console.log('received email:', response.results[0].email);
});
On the basis of the question's title, "Resolve promises one after another (i.e. in sequence)?", we might understand that the OP is more interested in the sequential handling of promises on settlement than sequential calls per se.
This answer is offered :
to demonstrate that sequential calls are not necessary for sequential handling of responses.
to expose viable alternative patterns to this page's visitors - including the OP if he is still interested over a year later.
despite the OP's assertion that he does not want to make calls concurrently, which may genuinely be the case but equally may be an assumption based on the desire for sequential handling of responses as the title implies.
If concurrent calls are genuinely not wanted then see Benjamin Gruenbaum's answer which covers sequential calls (etc) comprehensively.
If however, you are interested (for improved performance) in patterns which allow concurrent calls followed by sequential handling of responses, then please read on.
It's tempting to think you have to use Promise.all(arr.map(fn)).then(fn) (as I have done many times) or a Promise lib's fancy sugar (notably Bluebird's), however (with credit to this article) an arr.map(fn).reduce(fn) pattern will do the job, with the advantages that it :
works with any promise lib - even pre-compliant versions of jQuery - only .then() is used.
affords the flexibility to skip-over-error or stop-on-error, whichever you want with a one line mod.
Here it is, written for Q.
var readFiles = function(files) {
return files.map(readFile) //Make calls in parallel.
.reduce(function(sequence, filePromise) {
return sequence.then(function() {
return filePromise;
}).then(function(file) {
//Do stuff with file ... in the correct sequence!
}, function(error) {
console.log(error); //optional
return sequence;//skip-over-error. To stop-on-error, `return error` (jQuery), or `throw error` (Promises/A+).
});
}, Q()).then(function() {
// all done.
});
};
Note: only that one fragment, Q(), is specific to Q. For jQuery you need to ensure that readFile() returns a jQuery promise. With A+ libs, foreign promises will be assimilated.
The key here is the reduction's sequence promise, which sequences the handling of the readFile promises but not their creation.
And once you have absorbed that, it's maybe slightly mind-blowing when you realise that the .map() stage isn't actually necessary! The whole job, parallel calls plus serial handling in the correct order, can be achieved with reduce() alone, plus the added advantage of further flexibility to :
convert from parallel async calls to serial async calls by simply moving one line - potentially useful during development.
Here it is, for Q again.
var readFiles = function(files) {
return files.reduce(function(sequence, f) {
var filePromise = readFile(f);//Make calls in parallel. To call sequentially, move this line down one.
return sequence.then(function() {
return filePromise;
}).then(function(file) {
//Do stuff with file ... in the correct sequence!
}, function(error) {
console.log(error); //optional
return sequence;//Skip over any errors. To stop-on-error, `return error` (jQuery), or `throw error` (Promises/A+).
});
}, Q()).then(function() {
// all done.
});
};
That's the basic pattern. If you wanted also to deliver data (eg the files or some transform of them) to the caller, you would need a mild variant.
If someone else needs a guaranteed way of STRICTLY sequential way of resolving Promises when performing CRUD operations you also can use the following code as a basis.
As long as you add 'return' before calling each function, describing a Promise, and use this example as a basis the next .then() function call will CONSISTENTLY start after the completion of the previous one:
getRidOfOlderShoutsPromise = () => {
return readShoutsPromise('BEFORE')
.then(() => {
return deleteOlderShoutsPromise();
})
.then(() => {
return readShoutsPromise('AFTER')
})
.catch(err => console.log(err.message));
}
deleteOlderShoutsPromise = () => {
return new Promise ( (resolve, reject) => {
console.log("in deleteOlderShouts");
let d = new Date();
let TwoMinuteAgo = d - 1000 * 90 ;
All_Shouts.deleteMany({ dateTime: {$lt: TwoMinuteAgo}}, function(err) {
if (err) reject();
console.log("DELETED OLDs at "+d);
resolve();
});
});
}
readShoutsPromise = (tex) => {
return new Promise( (resolve, reject) => {
console.log("in readShoutsPromise -"+tex);
All_Shouts
.find({})
.sort([['dateTime', 'ascending']])
.exec(function (err, data){
if (err) reject();
let d = new Date();
console.log("shouts "+tex+" delete PROMISE = "+data.length +"; date ="+d);
resolve(data);
});
});
}
Array push and pop method can be used for sequence of promises. You can also push new promises when you need additional data. This is the code, I will use in React Infinite loader to load sequence of pages.
var promises = [Promise.resolve()];
function methodThatReturnsAPromise(page) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => {
console.log(`Resolve-${page}! ${new Date()} `);
resolve();
}, 1000);
});
}
function pushPromise(page) {
promises.push(promises.pop().then(function () {
return methodThatReturnsAPromise(page)
}));
}
pushPromise(1);
pushPromise(2);
pushPromise(3);
(function() {
function sleep(ms) {
return new Promise(function(resolve) {
setTimeout(function() {
return resolve();
}, ms);
});
}
function serial(arr, index, results) {
if (index == arr.length) {
return Promise.resolve(results);
}
return new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
if (!index) {
index = 0;
results = [];
}
return arr[index]()
.then(function(d) {
return resolve(d);
})
.catch(function(err) {
return reject(err);
});
})
.then(function(result) {
console.log("here");
results.push(result);
return serial(arr, index + 1, results);
})
.catch(function(err) {
throw err;
});
}
const a = [5000, 5000, 5000];
serial(a.map(x => () => sleep(x)));
})();
Here the key is how you call the sleep function. You need to pass an array of functions which itself returns a promise instead of an array of promises.

Categories

Resources