Related
I've been developing JavaScript for a few years and I don't understand the fuss about promises at all.
It seems like all I do is change:
api(function(result){
api2(function(result2){
api3(function(result3){
// do work
});
});
});
Which I could use a library like async for anyway, with something like:
api().then(function(result){
api2().then(function(result2){
api3().then(function(result3){
// do work
});
});
});
Which is more code and less readable. I didn't gain anything here, it's not suddenly magically 'flat' either. Not to mention having to convert things to promises.
So, what's the big fuss about promises here?
Promises are not callbacks. A promise represents the future result of an asynchronous operation. Of course, writing them the way you do, you get little benefit. But if you write them the way they are meant to be used, you can write asynchronous code in a way that resembles synchronous code and is much more easy to follow:
api().then(function(result){
return api2();
}).then(function(result2){
return api3();
}).then(function(result3){
// do work
});
Certainly, not much less code, but much more readable.
But this is not the end. Let's discover the true benefits: What if you wanted to check for any error in any of the steps? It would be hell to do it with callbacks, but with promises, is a piece of cake:
api().then(function(result){
return api2();
}).then(function(result2){
return api3();
}).then(function(result3){
// do work
}).catch(function(error) {
//handle any error that may occur before this point
});
Pretty much the same as a try { ... } catch block.
Even better:
api().then(function(result){
return api2();
}).then(function(result2){
return api3();
}).then(function(result3){
// do work
}).catch(function(error) {
//handle any error that may occur before this point
}).then(function() {
//do something whether there was an error or not
//like hiding an spinner if you were performing an AJAX request.
});
And even better: What if those 3 calls to api, api2, api3 could run simultaneously (e.g. if they were AJAX calls) but you needed to wait for the three? Without promises, you should have to create some sort of counter. With promises, using the ES6 notation, is another piece of cake and pretty neat:
Promise.all([api(), api2(), api3()]).then(function(result) {
//do work. result is an array contains the values of the three fulfilled promises.
}).catch(function(error) {
//handle the error. At least one of the promises rejected.
});
Hope you see Promises in a new light now.
Yes, Promises are asynchronous callbacks. They can't do anything that callbacks can't do, and you face the same problems with asynchrony as with plain callbacks.
However, Promises are more than just callbacks. They are a very mighty abstraction, allow cleaner and better, functional code with less error-prone boilerplate.
So what's the main idea?
Promises are objects representing the result of a single (asynchronous) computation. They resolve to that result only once. There's a few things what this means:
Promises implement an observer pattern:
You don't need to know the callbacks that will use the value before the task completes.
Instead of expecting callbacks as arguments to your functions, you can easily return a Promise object
The promise will store the value, and you can transparently add a callback whenever you want. It will be called when the result is available. "Transparency" implies that when you have a promise and add a callback to it, it doesn't make a difference to your code whether the result has arrived yet - the API and contracts are the same, simplifying caching/memoisation a lot.
You can add multiple callbacks easily
Promises are chainable (monadic, if you want):
If you need to transform the value that a promise represents, you map a transform function over the promise and get back a new promise that represents the transformed result. You cannot synchronously get the value to use it somehow, but you can easily lift the transformation in the promise context. No boilerplate callbacks.
If you want to chain two asynchronous tasks, you can use the .then() method. It will take a callback to be called with the first result, and returns a promise for the result of the promise that the callback returns.
Sounds complicated? Time for a code example.
var p1 = api1(); // returning a promise
var p3 = p1.then(function(api1Result) {
var p2 = api2(); // returning a promise
return p2; // The result of p2 …
}); // … becomes the result of p3
// So it does not make a difference whether you write
api1().then(function(api1Result) {
return api2().then(console.log)
})
// or the flattened version
api1().then(function(api1Result) {
return api2();
}).then(console.log)
Flattening does not come magically, but you can easily do it. For your heavily nested example, the (near) equivalent would be
api1().then(api2).then(api3).then(/* do-work-callback */);
If seeing the code of these methods helps understanding, here's a most basic promise lib in a few lines.
What's the big fuss about promises?
The Promise abstraction allows much better composability of functions. For example, next to then for chaining, the all function creates a promise for the combined result of multiple parallel-waiting promises.
Last but not least Promises come with integrated error handling. The result of the computation might be that either the promise is fulfilled with a value, or it is rejected with a reason. All the composition functions handle this automatically and propagate errors in promise chains, so that you don't need to care about it explicitly everywhere - in contrast to a plain-callback implementation. In the end, you can add a dedicated error callback for all occurred exceptions.
Not to mention having to convert things to promises.
That's quite trivial actually with good promise libraries, see How do I convert an existing callback API to promises?
In addition to the already established answers, with ES6 arrow functions Promises turn from a modestly shining small blue dwarf straight into a red giant. That is about to collapse into a supernova:
api().then(result => api2()).then(result2 => api3()).then(result3 => console.log(result3))
As oligofren pointed out, without arguments between api calls you don't need the anonymous wrapper functions at all:
api().then(api2).then(api3).then(r3 => console.log(r3))
And finally, if you want to reach a supermassive black hole level, Promises can be awaited:
async function callApis() {
let api1Result = await api();
let api2Result = await api2(api1Result);
let api3Result = await api3(api2Result);
return api3Result;
}
In addition to the awesome answers above, 2 more points may be added:
1. Semantic difference:
Promises may be already resolved upon creation. This means they guarantee conditions rather than events. If they are resolved already, the resolved function passed to it is still called.
Conversely, callbacks handle events. So, if the event you are interested in has happened before the callback has been registered, the callback is not called.
2. Inversion of control
Callbacks involve inversion of control. When you register a callback function with any API, the Javascript runtime stores the callback function and calls it from the event loop once it is ready to be run.
Refer The Javascript Event loop for an explanation.
With Promises, control resides with the calling program. The .then() method may be called at any time if we store the promise object.
In addition to the other answers, the ES2015 syntax blends seamlessly with promises, reducing even more boilerplate code:
// Sequentially:
api1()
.then(r1 => api2(r1))
.then(r2 => api3(r2))
.then(r3 => {
// Done
});
// Parallel:
Promise.all([
api1(),
api2(),
api3()
]).then(([r1, r2, r3]) => {
// Done
});
Promises are not callbacks, both are programming idioms that facilitate async programming. Using an async/await-style of programming using coroutines or generators that return promises could be considered a 3rd such idiom. A comparison of these idioms across different programming languages (including Javascript) is here: https://github.com/KjellSchubert/promise-future-task
No, Not at all.
Callbacks are simply Functions In JavaScript which are to be called and then executed after the execution of another function has finished. So how it happens?
Actually, In JavaScript, functions are itself considered as objects and hence as all other objects, even functions can be sent as arguments to other functions. The most common and generic use case one can think of is setTimeout() function in JavaScript.
Promises are nothing but a much more improvised approach of handling and structuring asynchronous code in comparison to doing the same with callbacks.
The Promise receives two Callbacks in constructor function: resolve and reject. These callbacks inside promises provide us with fine-grained control over error handling and success cases. The resolve callback is used when the execution of promise performed successfully and the reject callback is used to handle the error cases.
No promises are just wrapper on callbacks
example
You can use javascript native promises with node js
my cloud 9 code link : https://ide.c9.io/adx2803/native-promises-in-node
/**
* Created by dixit-lab on 20/6/16.
*/
var express = require('express');
var request = require('request'); //Simplified HTTP request client.
var app = express();
function promisify(url) {
return new Promise(function (resolve, reject) {
request.get(url, function (error, response, body) {
if (!error && response.statusCode == 200) {
resolve(body);
}
else {
reject(error);
}
})
});
}
//get all the albums of a user who have posted post 100
app.get('/listAlbums', function (req, res) {
//get the post with post id 100
promisify('http://jsonplaceholder.typicode.com/posts/100').then(function (result) {
var obj = JSON.parse(result);
return promisify('http://jsonplaceholder.typicode.com/users/' + obj.userId + '/albums')
})
.catch(function (e) {
console.log(e);
})
.then(function (result) {
res.end(result);
}
)
})
var server = app.listen(8081, function () {
var host = server.address().address
var port = server.address().port
console.log("Example app listening at http://%s:%s", host, port)
})
//run webservice on browser : http://localhost:8081/listAlbums
JavaScript Promises actually use callback functions to determine what to do after a Promise has been resolved or rejected, therefore both are not fundamentally different. The main idea behind Promises is to take callbacks - especially nested callbacks where you want to perform a sort of actions, but it would be more readable.
Promises overview:
In JS we can wrap asynchronous operations (e.g database calls, AJAX calls) in promises. Usually we want to run some additional logic on the retrieved data. JS promises have handler functions which process the result of the asynchronous operations. The handler functions can even have other asynchronous operations within them which could rely on the value of the previous asynchronous operations.
A promise always has of the 3 following states:
pending: starting state of every promise, neither fulfilled nor rejected.
fulfilled: The operation completed successfully.
rejected: The operation failed.
A pending promise can be resolved/fullfilled or rejected with a value. Then the following handler methods which take callbacks as arguments are called:
Promise.prototype.then() : When the promise is resolved the callback argument of this function will be called.
Promise.prototype.catch() : When the promise is rejected the callback argument of this function will be called.
Although the above methods skill get callback arguments they are far superior than using
only callbacks here is an example that will clarify a lot:
Example
function createProm(resolveVal, rejectVal) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => {
if (Math.random() > 0.5) {
console.log("Resolved");
resolve(resolveVal);
} else {
console.log("Rejected");
reject(rejectVal);
}
}, 1000);
});
}
createProm(1, 2)
.then((resVal) => {
console.log(resVal);
return resVal + 1;
})
.then((resVal) => {
console.log(resVal);
return resVal + 2;
})
.catch((rejectVal) => {
console.log(rejectVal);
return rejectVal + 1;
})
.then((resVal) => {
console.log(resVal);
})
.finally(() => {
console.log("Promise done");
});
The createProm function creates a promises which is resolved or rejected based on a random Nr after 1 second
If the promise is resolved the first then method is called and the resolved value is passed in as an argument of the callback
If the promise is rejected the first catch method is called and the rejected value is passed in as an argument
The catch and then methods return promises that's why we can chain them. They wrap any returned value in Promise.resolve and any thrown value (using the throw keyword) in Promise.reject. So any value returned is transformed into a promise and on this promise we can again call a handler function.
Promise chains give us more fine tuned control and better overview than nested callbacks. For example the catch method handles all the errors which have occurred before the catch handler.
Promises allows programmers to write simpler and far more readable code than by using callbacks.
In a program, there are steps want to do in series.
function f() {
step_a();
step_b();
step_c();
...
}
There's usually information carried between each step.
function f() {
const a = step_a( );
const b = step_b( a );
const c = step_c( b );
...
}
Some of these steps can take a (relatively) long time, so sometimes you want to do them in parallel with other things. One way to do that is using threads. Another is asynchronous programming. (Both approaches has pros and cons, which won't be discussed here.) Here, we're talking about asynchronous programming.
The simple way to achieve the above when using asynchronous programming would be to provide a callback which is called once a step is complete.
// step_* calls the provided function with the returned value once complete.
function f() {
step_a(
function( a )
step_b(
function( b )
step_c(
...
)
},
)
},
)
}
That's quite hard to read. Promises offer a way to flatten the code.
// step_* returns a promise.
function f() {
step_a()
.then( step_b )
.then( step_c )
...
}
The object returned is called a promise because it represents the future result (i.e. promised result) of the function (which could be a value or an exception).
As much as promises help, it's still a bit complicated to use promises. This is where async and await come in. In a function declared as async, await can be used in lieu of then.
// step_* returns a promise.
async function f()
const a = await step_a( );
const b = await step_b( a );
const c = await step_c( b );
...
}
This is undeniably much much more readable than using callbacks.
This question already has answers here:
How do I return the response from an asynchronous call?
(41 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
I have an es6 class, with an init() method responsible for fetching data, transforming it, then update the class's property this.data with newly transformed data.
So far so good.
The class itself has another getPostById() method, to just do what it sounds like. Here is the code for the class:
class Posts {
constructor(url) {
this.ready = false
this.data = {}
this.url = url
}
async init() {
try {
let res = await fetch( this.url )
if (res.ok) {
let data = await res.json()
// Do bunch of transformation stuff here
this.data = data
this.ready = true
return data
}
}
catch (e) {
console.log(e)
}
}
getPostById(id){
return this.data.find( p => p.id === id )
}
}
Straightforward, except I have an async/await mechanism in the init() method.
Now, this code will work correctly:
let allPosts = new Posts('https://jsonplaceholder.typicode.com/posts')
allPosts.init()
.then( d => console.log(allPosts.getPostById(4)) )
// resulting Object correctly logged in console
but it only gets printed into the console:
How could I use allPosts.getPostById(4) as a return of a function ?
Like:
let myFunc = async () => {
const postId = 4
await allPosts.init() // I need to wait for this to finish before returning
// This is logging correct value
console.log( 'logging: ' + JSON.stringify(allPosts.getPostById( postId ), null, 4) )
// How can I return the RESULT of allPosts.getPostById( postId ) ???
return allPosts.getPostById( postId )
}
myFunc() returns a Promise but not the final value. I have read several related posts on the subject but they all give example of logging, never returning.
Here is a fiddle that includes two ways of handling init(): using Promise and using async/await. No matter what I try, I can't manage to USE the FINAL VALUE of getPostById(id).
The question of this post is: how can I create a function that will RETURN the VALUE of getPostById(id) ?
EDIT:
A lot of good answers trying to explain what Promises are in regards to the main execution loop.
After a lot of videos and other good reads, here is what I understand now:
my function init() correctly returns. However, within the main event loop: it returns a Promise, then it is my job to catch the result of this Promise from within a kinda parallel loop (not a new real thread). In order to catch the result from the parallel loop there are two ways:
use .then( value => doSomethingWithMy(value) )
use let value = await myAsyncFn(). Now here is the foolish hiccup:
await can only be used within an async function :p
thus itself returning a Promise, usable with await which should be embed in an async function, which will be usable with await etc...
This means we cannot really WAIT for a Promise: instead we should catch parallel loop indefinitely: using .then() or async/await.
Thanks for the help !
As for your comment; I'll add it as answer.
The code you write in JavaScript is run on one thread, that means that if your code could actually wait for something it will block any of your other code from getting executed. The event loop of JavaScript is explained very well in this video and if you like to read in this page.
A good example of blocking code in the browser is alert("cannot do anything until you click ok");. Alert blocks everything, the user can't even scroll or click on anything in the page and your code also blocks from executing.
Promise.resolve(22)
.then(x=>alert("blocking")||"Hello World")
.then(
x=>console.log(
"does not resolve untill you click ok on the alert:",
x
)
);
Run that in a console and you see what I mean by blocking.
This creates a problem when you want to do something that takes time. In other frameworks you'd use a thread or processes but there is no such thing in JavaScript (technically there is with web worker and fork in node but that's another story and usually far more complicated than using async api's).
So when you want to make a http request you can use fetch but fetch takes some time to finish and your function should not block (has to return something as fast as possible). This is why fetch returns a promise.
Note that fetch is implemented by browser/node and does run in another thread, only code you write runs in one thread so starting a lot of promises that only run code you write will not speed up anything but calling native async api's in parallel will.
Before promises async code used callbacks or would return an observable object (like XmlHttpRequest) but let's cover promises since you can convert the more traditional code to a promise anyway.
A promise is an object that has a then function (and a bunch of stuff that is sugar for then but does the same), this function takes 2 parameters.
Resolve handler: A function that will be called by the promise when the promise resolves (has no errors and is finished). The function will be passed one argument with the resolve value (for http requests this usually is the response).
Reject handler: A function that will be called by the promise when the promise rejects (has an error). This function will be passed one argument, this is usually the error or reason for rejection (can be a string, number or anything).
Converting callback to promise.
The traditional api's (especially nodejs api's) use callbacks:
traditionalApi(
arg
,function callback(err,value){
err ? handleFail(err) : processValue(value);
}
);
This makes it difficult for the programmer to catch errors or handle the return value in a linear way (from top to bottom). It gets even more impossible to try and do things parallel or throttled parallel with error handling (impossible to read).
You can convert traditional api's to promises with new Promise
const apiAsPromise = arg =>
new Promise(
(resolve,reject)=>
traditionalApi(
arg,
(err,val) => (err) ? reject(err) : resolve(val)
)
)
async await
This is what's called syntax sugar for promises. It makes promise consuming functions look more traditional and easier to read. That is if you like to write traditional code, I would argue that composing small functions is much easier to read. For example, can you guess what this does?:
const handleSearch = search =>
compose([
showLoading,
makeSearchRequest,
processRespose,
hideLoading
])(search)
.then(
undefined,//don't care about the resolve
compose([
showError,
hideLoading
])
);
Anayway; enough ranting. The important part is to understand that async await doesn't actually start another thread, async functions always return a promise and await doesn't actually block or wait. It's syntax sugar for someFn().then(result=>...,error=>...) and looks like:
async someMethod = () =>
//syntax sugar for:
//return someFn().then(result=>...,error=>...)
try{
const result = await someFn();
...
}catch(error){
...
}
}
The examples allways show try catch but you don't need to do that, for example:
var alwaysReject = async () => { throw "Always returns rejected promise"; };
alwaysReject()
.then(
x=>console.log("never happens, doesn't resolve")
,err=>console.warn("got rejected:",err)
);
Any error thrown or await returning a rejected promise will cause the async function to return a rejected promise (unless you try and catch it). Many times it is desirable to just let it fail and have the caller handle errors.
Catching errors could be needed when you want the promise to succeed with a special value for rejected promises so you can handle it later but the promise does not technically reject so will always resolve.
An example is Promise.all, this takes an array of promises and returns a new promise that resolves to an array of resolved values or reject when any one of them rejects. You may just want to get the results of all promises back and filter out the rejected ones:
const Fail = function(details){this.details=details;},
isFail = item => (item && item.constructor)===Fail;
Promise.all(
urls.map(//map array of urls to array of promises that don't reject
url =>
fetch(url)
.then(
undefined,//do not handle resolve yet
//when you handle the reject this ".then" will return
// a promise that RESOLVES to the value returned below (new Fail([url,err]))
err=>new Fail([url,err])
)
)
)
.then(
responses => {
console.log("failed requests:");
console.log(
responses.filter(//only Fail type
isFail
)
);
console.log("resolved requests:");
console.log(
responses.filter(//anything not Fail type
response=>!isFail(response)
)
);
}
);
Your question and the comments suggest you could use a little intuition nudge about the way the event loop works. It really is confusing at first, but after a while it becomes second nature.
Rather than thinking about the FINAL VALUE, think about the fact that you have a single thread and you can't stop it — so you want the FUTURE VALUE -- the value on the next or some future event loop. Everything you write that is not asynchronous is going to happen almost immediately — functions return with some value or undefined immediately. There's nothing you can do about. When you need something asynchronously, you need to setup a system that is ready to deal with the async values when they return sometime in the future. This is what events, callbacks, promises (and async/await) all try to help with. If some data is asynchronous, you simply can not use it in the same event loop.
So what do you do?
If you want a pattern where you create an instance, call init() and then some function that further process it, you simply need to setup a system that does the processing when the data arrives. There are a lot of ways to do this. Here's one way that's a variation on your class:
function someAsync() {
console.log("someAsync called")
return new Promise(resolve => {
setTimeout(() => resolve(Math.random()), 1000)
})
}
class Posts {
constructor(url) {
this.ready = false
this.data = "uninitilized"
this.url = url
}
init() {
this.data = someAsync()
}
time100() {
// it's important to return the promise here
return this.data.then(d => d * 100)
}
}
let p = new Posts()
p.init()
processData(p)
// called twice to illustrate point
processData(p)
async function processData(posts) {
let p = await posts.time100()
console.log("randomin * 100:", p)
}
init() saves the promise returned from someAsync(). someAsync() could be anything that returns a promise. It saves the promise in an instance property. Now you can call then() or use async/await to get the value. It will either immediately return the value if the promise has already resolved or it will deal with it when it has resolved. I called processData(p) twice just to illustrate that it doesn't calle the someAsync() twice.
That's just one pattern. There are a lot more — using events, observables, just using then() directly, or even callbacks which are unfashionable, but still can be useful.
NOTE: Wherever you use await it has to be inside an async function.
Check out the UPDATED FIDDLE
You need to use await myFunc() to get the value you expect from getPostById because an async function always returns a promise.
This sometimes is very frustrating as the whole chain needs to be converted into async functions but that's the price you pay for converting it to a synchronous code, I guess. I am not sure if that can be avoided but am interested in hearing from people who have more experience on this.
Try out the below code in your console by copying over the functions and then accessing final and await final.
NOTE:
An async function CAN contain an await expression.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Statements/async_function
There is no rule that is must have await in order to even declare an async function.
The example below uses an async function without await just to show that an async function always returns a promise.
const sample = async () => {
return 100;
}
// sample() WILL RETURN A PROMISE AND NOT 100
// await sample() WILL RETURN 100
const init = async (num) => {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
resolve(num);
});
}
const myFunc = async (num) => {
const k = await init(num);
return k;
}
// const final = myFunc();
// final; This returns a promise
// await final; This returns the number you provided to myFunc
I've been developing JavaScript for a few years and I don't understand the fuss about promises at all.
It seems like all I do is change:
api(function(result){
api2(function(result2){
api3(function(result3){
// do work
});
});
});
Which I could use a library like async for anyway, with something like:
api().then(function(result){
api2().then(function(result2){
api3().then(function(result3){
// do work
});
});
});
Which is more code and less readable. I didn't gain anything here, it's not suddenly magically 'flat' either. Not to mention having to convert things to promises.
So, what's the big fuss about promises here?
Promises are not callbacks. A promise represents the future result of an asynchronous operation. Of course, writing them the way you do, you get little benefit. But if you write them the way they are meant to be used, you can write asynchronous code in a way that resembles synchronous code and is much more easy to follow:
api().then(function(result){
return api2();
}).then(function(result2){
return api3();
}).then(function(result3){
// do work
});
Certainly, not much less code, but much more readable.
But this is not the end. Let's discover the true benefits: What if you wanted to check for any error in any of the steps? It would be hell to do it with callbacks, but with promises, is a piece of cake:
api().then(function(result){
return api2();
}).then(function(result2){
return api3();
}).then(function(result3){
// do work
}).catch(function(error) {
//handle any error that may occur before this point
});
Pretty much the same as a try { ... } catch block.
Even better:
api().then(function(result){
return api2();
}).then(function(result2){
return api3();
}).then(function(result3){
// do work
}).catch(function(error) {
//handle any error that may occur before this point
}).then(function() {
//do something whether there was an error or not
//like hiding an spinner if you were performing an AJAX request.
});
And even better: What if those 3 calls to api, api2, api3 could run simultaneously (e.g. if they were AJAX calls) but you needed to wait for the three? Without promises, you should have to create some sort of counter. With promises, using the ES6 notation, is another piece of cake and pretty neat:
Promise.all([api(), api2(), api3()]).then(function(result) {
//do work. result is an array contains the values of the three fulfilled promises.
}).catch(function(error) {
//handle the error. At least one of the promises rejected.
});
Hope you see Promises in a new light now.
Yes, Promises are asynchronous callbacks. They can't do anything that callbacks can't do, and you face the same problems with asynchrony as with plain callbacks.
However, Promises are more than just callbacks. They are a very mighty abstraction, allow cleaner and better, functional code with less error-prone boilerplate.
So what's the main idea?
Promises are objects representing the result of a single (asynchronous) computation. They resolve to that result only once. There's a few things what this means:
Promises implement an observer pattern:
You don't need to know the callbacks that will use the value before the task completes.
Instead of expecting callbacks as arguments to your functions, you can easily return a Promise object
The promise will store the value, and you can transparently add a callback whenever you want. It will be called when the result is available. "Transparency" implies that when you have a promise and add a callback to it, it doesn't make a difference to your code whether the result has arrived yet - the API and contracts are the same, simplifying caching/memoisation a lot.
You can add multiple callbacks easily
Promises are chainable (monadic, if you want):
If you need to transform the value that a promise represents, you map a transform function over the promise and get back a new promise that represents the transformed result. You cannot synchronously get the value to use it somehow, but you can easily lift the transformation in the promise context. No boilerplate callbacks.
If you want to chain two asynchronous tasks, you can use the .then() method. It will take a callback to be called with the first result, and returns a promise for the result of the promise that the callback returns.
Sounds complicated? Time for a code example.
var p1 = api1(); // returning a promise
var p3 = p1.then(function(api1Result) {
var p2 = api2(); // returning a promise
return p2; // The result of p2 …
}); // … becomes the result of p3
// So it does not make a difference whether you write
api1().then(function(api1Result) {
return api2().then(console.log)
})
// or the flattened version
api1().then(function(api1Result) {
return api2();
}).then(console.log)
Flattening does not come magically, but you can easily do it. For your heavily nested example, the (near) equivalent would be
api1().then(api2).then(api3).then(/* do-work-callback */);
If seeing the code of these methods helps understanding, here's a most basic promise lib in a few lines.
What's the big fuss about promises?
The Promise abstraction allows much better composability of functions. For example, next to then for chaining, the all function creates a promise for the combined result of multiple parallel-waiting promises.
Last but not least Promises come with integrated error handling. The result of the computation might be that either the promise is fulfilled with a value, or it is rejected with a reason. All the composition functions handle this automatically and propagate errors in promise chains, so that you don't need to care about it explicitly everywhere - in contrast to a plain-callback implementation. In the end, you can add a dedicated error callback for all occurred exceptions.
Not to mention having to convert things to promises.
That's quite trivial actually with good promise libraries, see How do I convert an existing callback API to promises?
In addition to the already established answers, with ES6 arrow functions Promises turn from a modestly shining small blue dwarf straight into a red giant. That is about to collapse into a supernova:
api().then(result => api2()).then(result2 => api3()).then(result3 => console.log(result3))
As oligofren pointed out, without arguments between api calls you don't need the anonymous wrapper functions at all:
api().then(api2).then(api3).then(r3 => console.log(r3))
And finally, if you want to reach a supermassive black hole level, Promises can be awaited:
async function callApis() {
let api1Result = await api();
let api2Result = await api2(api1Result);
let api3Result = await api3(api2Result);
return api3Result;
}
In addition to the awesome answers above, 2 more points may be added:
1. Semantic difference:
Promises may be already resolved upon creation. This means they guarantee conditions rather than events. If they are resolved already, the resolved function passed to it is still called.
Conversely, callbacks handle events. So, if the event you are interested in has happened before the callback has been registered, the callback is not called.
2. Inversion of control
Callbacks involve inversion of control. When you register a callback function with any API, the Javascript runtime stores the callback function and calls it from the event loop once it is ready to be run.
Refer The Javascript Event loop for an explanation.
With Promises, control resides with the calling program. The .then() method may be called at any time if we store the promise object.
In addition to the other answers, the ES2015 syntax blends seamlessly with promises, reducing even more boilerplate code:
// Sequentially:
api1()
.then(r1 => api2(r1))
.then(r2 => api3(r2))
.then(r3 => {
// Done
});
// Parallel:
Promise.all([
api1(),
api2(),
api3()
]).then(([r1, r2, r3]) => {
// Done
});
Promises are not callbacks, both are programming idioms that facilitate async programming. Using an async/await-style of programming using coroutines or generators that return promises could be considered a 3rd such idiom. A comparison of these idioms across different programming languages (including Javascript) is here: https://github.com/KjellSchubert/promise-future-task
No, Not at all.
Callbacks are simply Functions In JavaScript which are to be called and then executed after the execution of another function has finished. So how it happens?
Actually, In JavaScript, functions are itself considered as objects and hence as all other objects, even functions can be sent as arguments to other functions. The most common and generic use case one can think of is setTimeout() function in JavaScript.
Promises are nothing but a much more improvised approach of handling and structuring asynchronous code in comparison to doing the same with callbacks.
The Promise receives two Callbacks in constructor function: resolve and reject. These callbacks inside promises provide us with fine-grained control over error handling and success cases. The resolve callback is used when the execution of promise performed successfully and the reject callback is used to handle the error cases.
No promises are just wrapper on callbacks
example
You can use javascript native promises with node js
my cloud 9 code link : https://ide.c9.io/adx2803/native-promises-in-node
/**
* Created by dixit-lab on 20/6/16.
*/
var express = require('express');
var request = require('request'); //Simplified HTTP request client.
var app = express();
function promisify(url) {
return new Promise(function (resolve, reject) {
request.get(url, function (error, response, body) {
if (!error && response.statusCode == 200) {
resolve(body);
}
else {
reject(error);
}
})
});
}
//get all the albums of a user who have posted post 100
app.get('/listAlbums', function (req, res) {
//get the post with post id 100
promisify('http://jsonplaceholder.typicode.com/posts/100').then(function (result) {
var obj = JSON.parse(result);
return promisify('http://jsonplaceholder.typicode.com/users/' + obj.userId + '/albums')
})
.catch(function (e) {
console.log(e);
})
.then(function (result) {
res.end(result);
}
)
})
var server = app.listen(8081, function () {
var host = server.address().address
var port = server.address().port
console.log("Example app listening at http://%s:%s", host, port)
})
//run webservice on browser : http://localhost:8081/listAlbums
JavaScript Promises actually use callback functions to determine what to do after a Promise has been resolved or rejected, therefore both are not fundamentally different. The main idea behind Promises is to take callbacks - especially nested callbacks where you want to perform a sort of actions, but it would be more readable.
Promises overview:
In JS we can wrap asynchronous operations (e.g database calls, AJAX calls) in promises. Usually we want to run some additional logic on the retrieved data. JS promises have handler functions which process the result of the asynchronous operations. The handler functions can even have other asynchronous operations within them which could rely on the value of the previous asynchronous operations.
A promise always has of the 3 following states:
pending: starting state of every promise, neither fulfilled nor rejected.
fulfilled: The operation completed successfully.
rejected: The operation failed.
A pending promise can be resolved/fullfilled or rejected with a value. Then the following handler methods which take callbacks as arguments are called:
Promise.prototype.then() : When the promise is resolved the callback argument of this function will be called.
Promise.prototype.catch() : When the promise is rejected the callback argument of this function will be called.
Although the above methods skill get callback arguments they are far superior than using
only callbacks here is an example that will clarify a lot:
Example
function createProm(resolveVal, rejectVal) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
setTimeout(() => {
if (Math.random() > 0.5) {
console.log("Resolved");
resolve(resolveVal);
} else {
console.log("Rejected");
reject(rejectVal);
}
}, 1000);
});
}
createProm(1, 2)
.then((resVal) => {
console.log(resVal);
return resVal + 1;
})
.then((resVal) => {
console.log(resVal);
return resVal + 2;
})
.catch((rejectVal) => {
console.log(rejectVal);
return rejectVal + 1;
})
.then((resVal) => {
console.log(resVal);
})
.finally(() => {
console.log("Promise done");
});
The createProm function creates a promises which is resolved or rejected based on a random Nr after 1 second
If the promise is resolved the first then method is called and the resolved value is passed in as an argument of the callback
If the promise is rejected the first catch method is called and the rejected value is passed in as an argument
The catch and then methods return promises that's why we can chain them. They wrap any returned value in Promise.resolve and any thrown value (using the throw keyword) in Promise.reject. So any value returned is transformed into a promise and on this promise we can again call a handler function.
Promise chains give us more fine tuned control and better overview than nested callbacks. For example the catch method handles all the errors which have occurred before the catch handler.
Promises allows programmers to write simpler and far more readable code than by using callbacks.
In a program, there are steps want to do in series.
function f() {
step_a();
step_b();
step_c();
...
}
There's usually information carried between each step.
function f() {
const a = step_a( );
const b = step_b( a );
const c = step_c( b );
...
}
Some of these steps can take a (relatively) long time, so sometimes you want to do them in parallel with other things. One way to do that is using threads. Another is asynchronous programming. (Both approaches has pros and cons, which won't be discussed here.) Here, we're talking about asynchronous programming.
The simple way to achieve the above when using asynchronous programming would be to provide a callback which is called once a step is complete.
// step_* calls the provided function with the returned value once complete.
function f() {
step_a(
function( a )
step_b(
function( b )
step_c(
...
)
},
)
},
)
}
That's quite hard to read. Promises offer a way to flatten the code.
// step_* returns a promise.
function f() {
step_a()
.then( step_b )
.then( step_c )
...
}
The object returned is called a promise because it represents the future result (i.e. promised result) of the function (which could be a value or an exception).
As much as promises help, it's still a bit complicated to use promises. This is where async and await come in. In a function declared as async, await can be used in lieu of then.
// step_* returns a promise.
async function f()
const a = await step_a( );
const b = await step_b( a );
const c = await step_c( b );
...
}
This is undeniably much much more readable than using callbacks.
This is more of a conceptual question. I understand the Promise design pattern, but couldn't find a reliable source to answer my question about promise.all():
What is(are) the correct scenario(s) to use promise.all()
OR
Are there any best practices to use promise.all()? Should it be ideally used only if all of the promise objects are of the same or similar types?
The only one I could think of is:
Use promise.all() if you want to resolve the promise only if all of the promise objects resolve and reject if even one rejects.
I'm not sure anyone has really given the most general purpose explanation for when to use Promise.all() (and when not to use it):
What is(are) the correct scenario(s) to use promise.all()
Promise.all() is useful anytime you have more than one promise and your code wants to know when all the operations that those promises represent have finished successfully. It does not matter what the individual async operations are. If they are async, are represented by promises and your code wants to know when they have all completed successfully, then Promise.all() is built to do exactly that.
For example, suppose you need to gather information from three separate remote API calls and when you have the results from all three API calls, you then need to run some further code using all three results. That situation would be perfect for Promise.all(). You could so something like this:
Promise.all([apiRequest(...), apiRequest(...), apiRequest(...)]).then(function(results) {
// API results in the results array here
// processing can continue using the results of all three API requests
}, function(err) {
// an error occurred, process the error here
});
Promise.all() is probably most commonly used with similar types of requests (as in the above example), but there is no reason that it needs to be. If you had a different case where you needed to make a remote API request, read a local file and read a local temperature probe and then when you had data from all three async operations, you wanted to then do some processing with the data from all three, you would again use Promise.all():
Promise.all([apiRequest(...), fs.promises.readFile(...), readTemperature(...)]).then(function(results) {
// all results in the results array here
// processing can continue using the results of all three async operations
}, function(err) {
// an error occurred, process the error here
});
On the flip side, if you don't need to coordinate among them and can just handle each async operation individually, then you don't need Promise.all(). You can just fire each of your separate async operations with their own .then() handlers and no coordination between them is needed.
In addition Promise.all() has what is called a "fast fail" implementation. It returns a master promise that will reject as soon as the first promise you passed it rejects or it will resolve when all the promises have resolved. So, to use Promise.all() that type of implementation needs to work for your situation. There are other situations where you want to run multiple async operations and you need all the results, even if some of them failed. Promise.all() will not do that for you directly. Instead, you would likely use something like Promise.settle() for that situation. You can see an implementation of .settle() here which gives you access to all the results, even if some failed. This is particularly useful when you expect that some operations might fail and you have a useful task to pursue with the results from whatever operations succeeded or you want to examine the failure reasons for all the operations that failed to make decisions based on that.
Are there any best practices to use promise.all()? Should it be
ideally used only if all of the promise objects are of the same or
similar types?
As explained above, it does not matter what the individual async operations are or if they are the same type. It only matters whether your code needs to coordinate them and know when they all succeed.
It's also useful to list some situations when you would not use Promise.all():
When you only have one async operation. With only one operation, you can just use a .then() handler on the one promise and there is no reason for Promise.all().
When you don't need to coordinate among multiple async operations.
When a fast fail implementation is not appropriate. If you need all results, even if some fail, then Promise.all() will not do that by itself. You will probably want something like Promise.allSettled() instead.
If your async operations do not all return promises, Promise.all() cannot track an async operation that is not managed through a promise.
Promise.all is for waiting for several Promises to resolve in parallel (at the same time). It returns a Promise that resolves when all of the input Promises have resolved:
// p1, p2, p3 are Promises
Promise.all([p1, p2, p3])
.then(([p1Result, p2Result, p3Result]) => {
// This function is called when p1, p2 and p3 have all resolved.
// The arguments are the resolved values.
})
If any of the input Promises is rejected, the Promise returned by Promise.all is also rejected.
A common scenario is waiting for several API requests to finish so you can combine their results:
const contentPromise = requestUser();
const commentsPromise = requestComments();
const combinedContent = Promise.all([contentPromise, commentsPromise])
.then(([content, comments]) => {
// content and comments have both finished loading.
})
You can use Promise.all with Promise instance.
It's hard to answer these questions as they are the type that tend to answer themselves as one uses the available APIs of a language feature. Basically, it's fine to use Promises any way that suits your use case, so long as you avoid their anti-patterns.
What is(are) the correct scenario(s) to use promise.all()
Any situation in which an operation depends on the successful resolution of multiple promises.
Are there any best practices to use promise.all()? Should it be ideally used only if all of the promise objects are of the same or similar types?
Generally, no and no.
I use promise.all() when I have to do some requests to my API and I don't want to display something before the application loads all the data requested, so I delay the execution flow until I have all the data I need.
Example:
What I want to do I want to load the users of my app and their products (imagine that you have to do multiple requests) before displaying a table in my app with the user emails and the product names of each user.
What I do next I send the requests to my API creating the promises and using promise.all()
What I do when all the data has been loaded Once the data arrives to my app, I can execute the callback of promises.all() and then make visible the table with the users.
I hope it helps you to see in which scenario makes sense to use promises.all()
As #joews mentioned, probably one of the important features of Promise.all that should be explicitly indicated is that it makes your async code much faster.
This makes it ideal in any code that contains independent calls (that we want to return/finish before the rest of the code continues), but especially when we make frontend calls and want the user's experience to be as smooth as possible.
async function waitSecond() {
return new Promise((res, rej) => {
setTimeout(res, 1000);
});
}
function runSeries() {
console.time('series');
waitSecond().then(() => {
waitSecond().then(() => {
waitSecond().then(() => {
console.timeEnd('series');
});
});
});
}
function runParallel() {
console.time('parallel');
Promise.all([
waitSecond(),
waitSecond(),
waitSecond(),
]).then(() => {
console.timeEnd('parallel');
});
}
runSeries();
runParallel();
I tend to use promise all for something like this:
myService.getUsers()
.then(users => {
this.users = users;
var profileRequests = users.map(user => {
return myService.getProfile(user.Id); // returns a promise
});
return Promise.all(profileRequests);
})
.then(userProfilesRequest => {
// do something here with all the user profiles, like assign them back to the users.
this.users.forEach((user, index) => {
user.profile = userProfilesRequest[index];
});
});
Here, for each user we're going off and getting their profile. I don't want my promise chain to get out of hand now that i have x amount of promises to resolve.
So Promise.all() will basically aggregate all my promises back into one, and I can manage that through the next then. I can keep doing this for as long as a like, say for each profile I want to get related settings etc. etc. Each time I create tonnes more promises, I can aggregate them all back into one.
Promise.all-This method is useful for when you want to wait for more than one promise to complete or The Promise.all(iterable) method returns a promise that resolves when all of the promises in the iterable argument have resolved, or rejects with the reason of the first passed promise that rejects.
2.Just use Promise.all(files).catch(err => { })
This throws an error if ANY of the promises are rejected.
3.Use .reflect on the promises before .all if you want to wait for all
promises to reject or fulfill
Syntax -Promise.all(iterable);
Promise.all passes an array of values from all the promises in the iterable object that it was passed.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Promise/all
var isCallFailed = false;
function myEndpoint1() {
return isCallFailed ? Promise.reject("Bohoo!") :Promise.resolve({"a":"a"});
}
function myEndpoint2() {
return Promise.resolve({"b":"b"});
}
Promise.all([myEndpoint1(), myEndpoint2()])
.then(values => {
var data1 = values[0];
var data2 = values[1];
alert("SUCCESS... data1: " + JSON.stringify(data1) + "; data2: " + JSON.stringify(data2));
})
.catch(error => {
alert("ERROR... " + error);
});
you can try another case by making isCallFailed = true.
Use Promise.all only when you need to run a code according to the result of more than one asynchronous operations using promises.
For example:
You have a scenario like, You need to download 2000 mb file from server, and at the same time you are going to free the user storage to make sure it can save the downloaded file.
And you need to save only in case if the file is downloaded successfully and the storage space is created successfully.
you will do like this.
your first asynchronous operation
var p1 = new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
// you need to download 2000mb file and return resolve if
// you successfully downloaded the file
})
and your second asynchronous operation
var p2 = new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
// you need to clear the user storage for 2000 mb
// which can take some time
})
Now you want to save only when both of the promises resolved successfully, otherwise not.
You will use promise.all like this.
Promise.all([p1,p2]).then((result)=>{
// you will be here only if your both p1 and p2 are resolved successfully.
// you code to save the downloaded file here
})
.catch((error)=>{
// you will be here if at-least one promise in p1,p2 is rejected.
// show error to user
// take some other action
})
Promise.all can be used in a scenario when there is a routine which is validating multiplerules based on particular criteria and you have to execute them all in parallel and need to see the results of those rules at one point. Promise.all returns the results as an array which were resolved in your rule vaidator routine.
E.g.
const results = await Promise.all([validateRule1, validateRule2, validateRule3, ...]);
then results array may look like (depending upon the conditions) as for example: [true, false, false]
Now you can reject/accept the results you have based on return values. Using this way you won't have to apply multiple conditions with if-then-else.
If you are interested only Promise.all then read below Promise.all
Promise (usually they are called "Promise") - provide a convenient way to organize asynchronous code.
Promise - is a special object that contains your state. Initially, pending ( «waiting"), and then - one of: fulfilled ( «was successful") or rejected ( «done with error").
On the promise to hang callbacks can be of two types:
unFulfilled - triggered when the promise in a state of "completed
successfully."
Rejected - triggered when the promise in the "made in error."
The syntax for creating the Promise:
var promise = new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
// This function will be called automatically
// It is possible to make any asynchronous operations,
// And when they will end - you need to call one of:
// resolve(result) on success
// reject(error) on error
})
Universal method for hanging handlers:
promise.then(onFulfilled, onRejected)
onFulfilled - a function that will be called with the result with
resolve.
onRejected - a function that will be called when an error reject.
With its help you can assign both the handler once, and only one:
// onFulfilled It works on success
promise.then(onFulfilled)
// onRejected It works on error
promise.then(null, onRejected)
Synchronous throw - the same that reject
'use strict';
let p = new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
// то же что reject(new Error("o_O"))
throw new Error("o_O");
});
p.catch(alert); // Error: o_O
Promisification
Promisification - When taking asynchronous functionality and make it a wrapper for returning PROMIS.
After Promisification functional use often becomes much more convenient.
As an example, make a wrapper for using XMLHttpRequest requests
httpGet function (url) will return PROMIS, which upon successful data loading with the url will go into fulfilled with these data, and in case of error - in rejected with an error information:
function httpGet(url) {
return new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
var xhr = new XMLHttpRequest();
xhr.open('GET', url, true);
xhr.onload = function() {
if (this.status == 200) {
resolve(this.response);
} else {
var error = new Error(this.statusText);
error.code = this.status;
reject(error);
}
};
xhr.onerror = function() {
reject(new Error("Network Error"));
};
xhr.send();
});
}
As you can see, inside the function XMLHttpRequest object is created and sent as usual, when onload / onerror are called, respectively, resolve (at the status 200) or reject.
Using:
httpGet("/article/promise/user.json")
.then(
response => alert(`Fulfilled: ${response}`),
error => alert(`Rejected: ${error}`)
);
Parallel execution
What if we want to implement multiple asynchronous processes simultaneously and to process their results?
The Promise class has the following static methods.
Promise.all(iterable)
Call Promise.all (iterable) receives an array (or other iterable object) and returns PROMIS PROMIS, which waits until all transferred PROMIS completed, and changes to the state "done" with an array of results.
For example:
Promise.all([
httpGet('/article/promise/user.json'),
httpGet('/article/promise/guest.json')
]).then(results => {
alert(results);
});
Let's say we have an array of URL.
let urls = [
'/article/promise/user.json',
'/article/promise/guest.json'
];
To download them in parallel, you need to:
Create for each URL corresponding to PROMIS.
Wrap an array of PROMIS in Promise.all.
We obtain this:
'use strict';
let urls = [
'/article/promise/user.json',
'/article/promise/guest.json'
];
Promise.all( urls.map(httpGet) )
.then(results => {
alert(results);
});
Note that if any of Promise ended with an error, the result will
Promise.all this error.
At the same time the rest of PROMIS ignored.
For example:
Promise.all([
httpGet('/article/promise/user.json'),
httpGet('/article/promise/guest.json'),
httpGet('/article/promise/no-such-page.json') // (нет такой страницы)
]).then(
result => alert("не сработает"),
error => alert("Ошибка: " + error.message) // Ошибка: Not Found
)
In total:
Promise - is a special object that stores its state, the current
result (if any), and callbacks.
When you create a new Promise ((resolve, reject) => ...) function
argument starts automatically, which should call resolve (result) on
success, and reject (error) - error.
Argument resolve / reject (only the first, and the rest are ignored)
is passed to handlers on this Promise.
Handlers are appointed by calling .then / catch.
To transfer the results from one processor to another using Channing.
https://www.promisejs.org/patterns/
Question:
Is there an "easy" way to cancel ($q-/$http-)promises in AngularJS or determine the order in which promises were resolved?
Example
I have a long running calculation and i request the result via $http. Some actions or events require me to restart the calculation (and thus sending a new $http request) before the initial promise is resolved. Thus i imagine i can't use a simple implementation like
$http.post().then(function(){
//apply data to view
})
because I can't ensure that the responses come back in the order in which i did send the requests - after all i want to show the result of the latest calculation when all promises were resolved properly.
However I would like to avoid waiting for the first response until i send a new request like this:
const timeExpensiveCalculation = function(){
return $http.post().then(function(response){
if (isNewCalculationChained) {return timeExpensiveCalculation();}
else {return response.data;}
})
}
Thoughts:
When using $http i can access the config-object on the response to use some timestamps or other identifiers to manually order the incoming responses. However i was hoping I could just tell angular somehow to cancel an outdated promise and thus not run the .then() function when it gets resolved.
This does not work without manual implementation for $q-promises instead of $http though.
Maybe just rejecting the promise right away is the way to go? But in both cases it might take forever until finally a promise is resolved before the next request is generated (which leads to an empty view in the meantime).
Is there some angular API-Function that i am missing or are there robust design patterns or "tricks" with promise chaining or $q.all to handle multiple promises that return the "same" data?
I do it by generating a requestId, and in the promise's then() function I check if the response is coming from the most recent requestId.
While this approach does not actually cancel the previous promises, it does provide a quick and easy way to ensure that you are handling the most recent request's response.
Something like:
var activeRequest;
function doRequest(params){
// requestId is the id for the request being made in this function call
var requestId = angular.toJson(params); // I usually md5 hash this
// activeRequest will always be the last requestId sent out
activeRequest = requestId;
$http.get('/api/something', {data: params})
.then(function(res){
if(activeRequest == requestId){
// this is the response for last request
// activeRequest is now handled, so clear it out
activeRequest = undefined;
}
else {
// response from previous request (typically gets ignored)
}
});
}
Edit:
On a side-note, I wanted to add that this concept of tracking requestId's can also be applied to preventing duplicate requests. For example, in my Data service's load(module, id) method, I do a little process like this:
generate the requestId based on the URL + parameters.
check in requests hash-table for the requestId
if requestId is not found: generate new request and store promise in hash-table
if requestId is found: simply return the promise from the hash-table
When the request finishes, remove the requestId's entry from the hash-table.
Cancelling a promise is just making it not invoke the onFulfilled and onRejected functions at the then stage. So as #user2263572 mentioned it's always best to let go the promise not cancelled (ES6 native promises can not be cancelled anyways) and handle this condition within it's then stage (like disregarding the task if a global variable is set to 2 as shown in the following snippet) and i am sure you can find tons of other ways to do it. One example could be;
Sorry that i use v (looks like check character) for resolve and x (obvious) for reject functions.
var prom1 = new Promise((v,x) => setTimeout(v.bind(null,"You shall not read this"),2000)),
prom2,
validPromise = 1;
prom1.then(val => validPromise === 1 && console.log(val));
// oh what have i done..!?! Now i have to fire a new promise
prom2 = new Promise((v,x) => setTimeout(v.bind(null,"This is what you will see"),3000));
validPromise = 2;
prom2.then(val => validPromise === 2 && console.log(val));
I'm still trying to figure out a good way to unit test this, but you could try out this kind of strategy:
var canceller = $q.defer();
service.sendCalculationRequest = function () {
canceller.resolve();
return $http({
method: 'GET',
url: '/do-calculation',
timeout: canceller.promise
});
};
In ECMA6 promises, there is a Promise.race(promiseArray) method. This takes an array of promises as its argument, and returns a single promise. The first promise to resolve in the array will hand off its resolved value to the .then of the returned promise, while the other array promises that came in second, etc., will not be waited upon.
Example:
var httpCall1 = $http.get('/api/something', {data: params})
.then(function(val) {
return {
id: "httpCall1"
val: val
}
})
var httpCall2 = $http.get('/api/something-else', {data: params})
.then(function(val) {
return {
id: "httpCall2"
val: val
}
})
// Might want to make a reusable function out of the above two, if you use this in Production
Promise.race([httpCall1, httpCall2])
.then(function(winningPromise) {
console.log('And the winner is ' + winningPromise.id);
doSomethingWith(winningPromise.val);
});
You could either use this with a Promise polyfil, or look into the q.race that someone's developed for Angular (though I haven't tested it).