Re: Rise of Node -- WEB400

Subject: Re: Rise of Node
From: Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 09:13:52 -0600
List-archive: <https://archive.midrange.com/web400/>
List-help: <mailto:web400-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: "Web Enabling the IBM i \(AS/400 and iSeries\)" <web400.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:web400@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400>, <mailto:web400-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/options/web400>, <mailto:web400-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 10:26 PM, Henrik Rützou <hr@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Nathan you are wrong, your statement should be await ...

While I appreciate the syntax improvement offered by asynchronous functions
and await blocks, that wasn't my point. That syntax is only available
recently. And callbacks are still occurring under the covers. My point was
that the event-loop architecture is poorly suited for the implementation of
data validation, business rules, and other functional requirements of
business applications.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

Re: Rise of Node , Henrik Rützou

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.