How is this better than caolan/async

Question

How is this better than caolan/async

Closed this issue 13 years ago · 3 comments

paulmillr commented 13 years ago

?

I see it's three times smaller and has 1/5 of its tests.

Answer 1 · 2012-05-17T22:01:05.000Z

Because I wrote it! NIH

Mainly because it grew organically from a single function to a subset of async.

One can consider this the sensible subset of async and the API signatures are slightly different (for example I support the optional this parameter in array iterators where as async does not and I also support iterating over objects rather then just arrays).

Answer 2 · 2012-05-17T22:06:13.000Z

nih is always a good reason, so i'm closing the question

Answer 3 · 2012-05-17T22:14:09.000Z

Seriously though

Exposes the after primitive
Has a flow primitive with it slightly different API i believe is optimum
Only supports array iterators and primitives. Keeps the API small.
Array iterators accept objects and support optional this param
Does not have any "convenience" utilities that have negative performance effects like waterfall or seriesSync
does not reimplement a subset of ES5 shim
has less complexity